link to Expropriation Law Centre home page

Cases



Menu

Advertisement

Peterson Stark Scott

Advertisement


Free Case Law
[Back] DECISION DIGEST  
Record no. 3317
Case name: Fontana v. Oxford (County)
Date: 2020-02-21
Jurisdiction: Canada - Ontario
Court: Local Planning Appeal Tribunal
Release registry: [Subscribers only]
Court file: [Subscribers only]
Order no.: [Subscribers only]
Parties: Name   Appearing as
  Blandford Square Developments Limited   Claimant
  Calvano, Antonio   Claimant
  Fontana, Luigi   Claimant
  Marignani, Guiseppe   Claimant
  Mintz, Irwin   Claimant
  Rui, Mirto   Claimant
  Vincorp Financial Limited   Claimant
  Oxford (County)   Respondent
Before: Decision maker Designation
Lanthier, David L. Member
Lawyers: Name   Appearing for
  Ackerman, Robert Giles   Claimant
  Tzekas, Christopher James   Claimant
  Baker, Andrew Michael   Respondent
  Lesage, Julie Marianne   Respondent
  Waque, Stephen F.   Respondent
Experts: Name Occupation Appearing for
  Zimmerman, Tim Valuator Claimant
  Tautrims, Glenn Valuator Respondent
Taking type: [Subscribers only]
Valuation date: [Subscribers only]
Case elements: [Subscribers only]
Decision: Application to the Ontario Local Planning Appeal Tribunal for determination of compensation payable to the Claimants by the Respondent pursuant to the Expropriations Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.26. Full taking of a parcel of land located in the County of Oxford. The land was taken for purposes of an auto assembly plant. The parties settled many of the outstanding issues during the course of the hearing including market value, which was agreed at $3.6 million, leaving the Tribunal to determine only certain unresolved issues as to the interests of the security holders. The Tribunal found that the market value of the land taken was less than the amount secured by the first mortgage. It was held that the first mortgagee Claimant was only entitled to compensation equal to the market value of the land and the remaining security interest Claimants were not entitled to receive compensation.
Comment: [Subscribers only]
Statute references: [Subscribers only]
Case references: [Subscribers only]
Related decisions:      
  Earlier
  [2006] EXLAW 18 Ont. S.C.J. 2006-03-24
  [2006] EXLAW 19 Ont. S.C.J. 2006-07-12
  [2007] EXLAW 2 Ont. C.A. 2007-04-20
  [2007] EXLAW 7 Ont. C.A. 2007-06-26
  [2009] EXLAW 3 Ont. S.C.J. 2009-01-20
  [2014] EXLAW 7 Ont. S.C.J. 2014-04-30
  [2014] EXLAW 26 Ont. C.A. 2014-12-08
  [2015] EXLAW 40 S.C.C. 2015-05-21
  [2016] EXLAW 28 Ont. M.B. 2016-10-06
  [2016] EXLAW 48 Ont. M.B. 2016-11-25
  [2017] EXLAW 44 Ont. M.B. 2017-01-03
  [2017] EXLAW 3 Ont. M.B. 2017-05-05
  [2019] EXLAW 23 Ont. L.P.A.T. 2019-09-13
  [2019] EXLAW 26 Ont. L.P.A.T. 2019-10-22
  Later
 
Neutral citation: N/A
ExLaw citation: [2020] EXLAW 1
Parallel citations: 2020 Can LII 14751
  2020 CarswellOnt 2752
  (2020) 16 L.C.R. (2d) 151
  2020 LNONLPAT 156
Reasons: [Subscribers only]
Digests contain original content produced by ExLaw and copyright in this content is held by Dicta Legal Services Ltd. (dba Expropriation Law Centre). Reasons for decision are the text of original decisions released by the court or tribunal and edited for accuracy where required. No copyright is claimed for these materials.
Join the Mailing List
Enter your name and email address below:
Name:

Email:


Subscribe 
Unsubscribe 

Online Subscription
Service
Online Subscription Service sign-up
Online Subscription Service log-in

Advertisement


© 2024 Dicta Legal Services Ltd.
Page last updated: April 21, 2024