Iler Campbell LLP - Latest Comments

Re: The Pope on co-ops

bob — Sat, 13 Jun 2015 14:52:56 -0000

This pope, I like him

Re: Landlord and Tenant Board panel aims to define legal relationships between indirect housing providers, landlords and tenants

Dave McFarlane — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 22:25:36 -0000

This is very interesting, I am curious though about what impact if any did the contracts between all parties had if any. Did they not contain definitions which would create a context within the Landlord Tenancy Act. I would love to hear more on this.

Re: The Stronger Workplaces for a Stronger Economy Act: Meeting your obligations as an employer in 2015

Fraser @ Iler Campbell — Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:49:56 -0000

Good question Emma! Sorry about the confusion - that was a typo on our part. You're right, the date is May 20th. I've corrected the article.

Re: The Stronger Workplaces for a Stronger Economy Act: Meeting your obligations as an employer in 2015

Emma L — Thu, 15 Jan 2015 15:41:27 -0000

Thanks for all the information! Could you please tell me where I can find the January 19th deadline in the legislation? I can only find May 20th, 2015 for the poster under Part II.

Re: LTB co-op evictions – report on the first 10 orders

Celia Chandler — Mon, 06 Oct 2014 11:38:44 -0000

Emma,

Although we were not involved in the discussions about how the LTB process would relate to the Co-op process, presumably there was a feeling that the full internal democratic process should be exhausted before the LTB process began.

In the new CHF Model by-law, except where there is a right of appeal granted, it's recommended that the termination date be limited to 10 days following the meeting for all evictions. See Articles 11.7(b) and 12.2(d) in the new model. This should help a little with the timing issue you raise.

Re: LTB co-op evictions – report on the first 10 orders

Emma Lander — Mon, 29 Sep 2014 09:45:37 -0000

This is interesting.
I still don't understand the rationale for the timelines in the act. It would be preferable if the N4C could be issued concurrently with the Notice of Decision and set them both at 14 days.
As the co-op member has already had at least 10 days notice to appear and at least 20 days before the termination date, this is a month more than what a tenant under the RTA would get. It unnecessarily lengthens the process.

Re: The Responsible Housing Provider — Who can appear at the Landlord and Tenant Board?

Celia Chandler — Fri, 26 Sep 2014 11:56:48 -0000

Brian, Emma,

You raise a very interesting question about who is entitled to appear at the Landlord and Tenant Board on behalf of co-ops.

CHF Canada, Ontario Region, has a series of bulletins called “Evictions, What Co-ops Need to Know,” the fifth of which relates to your questions. You can find the bulletin at:

http://www.chfcanada.coop/e...

CHF notes though that there are no guarantees that the position it has taken would be upheld if challenged.

CHF further notes that whoever attends the LTB on behalf of the Co-op needs to have the skills to give the best representation to the Co-op. We certainly agree that this is prudent advice.

Re: The Responsible Housing Provider — Who can appear at the Landlord and Tenant Board?

Emma Lander — Wed, 24 Sep 2014 16:23:01 -0000

Futher to Brian's question, would members of the board of directors of a co-op be allowed to appear on behalf of the co-op?

Re: The Responsible Housing Provider — Who can appear at the Landlord and Tenant Board?

Brian Burch — Fri, 29 Mar 2013 11:52:45 -0000

Celia, would the fact that most directly employed co-op staff are officers of the co-operative, according to the CCA, permit them to be seen as legitimately appearing on behalf of their co-operative?

(“senior officer” means, (a) the chair or any vice-chair of the board of directors, the president, any vice-president, the secretary, the treasurer or the general manager of a co-operative or any other individual who performs functions for the co-operative similar to those normally performed by an individual occupying any such office, and (b) each of the five highest paid employees of a co-operative, including any individual referred to in clause (a); (“cadre dirigeant”)

Re: Jarvis Bike Lane Removal Exposes Serious Weaknesses in Municipal Class Approvals

Murray Lumley — Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:13:15 -0000

This article was very informative and revealing of the way that a municipality can create infrastructure that is unsafe - like the five car lanes that are too narrow and have caused numerous collisions. This should not be allowed.

Re: Jarvis Bike Lane Removal Exposes Serious Weaknesses in Municipal Class Approvals

Paul Young — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:17:54 -0000

Yes, thanks for the analysis. It will be of interest to countless people and groups across Ontario advocating for better walking and cycling conditions.

Re: Jarvis Bike Lane Removal Exposes Serious Weaknesses in Municipal Class Approvals

scunny — Mon, 15 Oct 2012 11:55:21 -0000

Thanks Ms. Bowman for all you have done on this file, and for sharing your thoughts and observations with us, as well.

Everyday those bike lanes remain in place on Jarvis, Toronto is a safer city for every one of us, regardless of personal mobility choice.

One hopes any and all other possible legal avenues to prevent the arguably criminal act of erasing said citizen-safer infrastructure improvements are still being pursued.

Re: Ontario Human Rights Commission launches new policy to address when rights collide

Mmenon16 — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 23:21:41 -0000

This is encouraging indeed. We are slowly but surely moving towards a more compassionate society that takes into account the needs and wants of all persons. Undoubtedly, the issue of the rights of electrohypersensitive individuals/those who oppose being irradiated ad nauseum (by wi-fi, cell towers, smart meters, cell phones etc) versus the status quo rights of microwave radiation anytime, anywhere should be identified as a current and looming issue.

Re: The Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act in force as of October 17, 2011

Joe — Tue, 18 Oct 2011 19:46:09 -0000

Great photo, Ted!

Re: Ten Years after the Walkerton Tragedy

Jim Poushinsky — Fri, 24 Dec 2010 20:41:44 -0000

Hello Paula,

Regarding the right of municipalities to protect waters so they are potable - we are in rural Ottawa, and in the Fall of 2009 we studied a field adjacent to the village of Vernon where biosolids were to be spread. We discovered two abandoned wells that would give direct access to the aquifer for sewage pollutants; this resulted in the area of the original site application being reduced by half. We took readings in the field boundary ditch just before it entered the South Castor River. Before spreading and shortly after, the readings were less then 10 e-coli per 100 ml, but following a heavy rain the reading jumped to 990 e-coli. We also discovered the tile drains under the field were not flowing and obviously blocked, which will allow the rising water table to leach sewage contaminants into the underlying aquifer. And we took a picture of flood debris from the previous Spring snow melt flood lodged in tree branches a foot above the surface of the sewaged field. Both the City and MOE knew we were watching, and their inspectors did their best to ensure the MOE/OMAFRA spreading guidelines/regulations were followed. So the problems we uncovered, i.e. 2 unknown abandoned wells, blocked tile drains, 990 e-coli per 100 ml field run-off into the South Castor River, and the field being on a flood plain that is underwater in Spring run-off allowing the 10% of sewage remaining on the surface after disking to wash into the river, are all evidence the Ontario MOE spreading guidelines are inadequate to protect both our surface waters and the underlying aquifers. Surely such evidence is sufficient reason for municipalities to act to stop sewage spreading, particularly when those engaged in the spreading (government, industry, and farmers) have not and will not test for sewage run-off after heavy rains and in flood conditions, and cannot back up their claim that the Guidelines they rely on prevent such contamination. We intend to present our evidence to the CCME consultation now underway on sewage biosolids spreading, and ask for a stop to this practice in all provinces of Canada.

Jim Poushinsky,
Chair, Ottawa Citizens Against Pollution by Sewage
jpoushinsky@xplornet.com
tel. 613-821-2409