Horton CBI Ltd. v. Regional Assessment Commissioner, Region No. 18 and Fort Erie (Town), (1986) 13 O.A.C. 318 (DC)

• Judge: Callaghan, A.C.J.H.C., Steele and O'Brien, JJ.
• Court: Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
• Case Date: February 26, 1986
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1986), 13 O.A.C. 318 (DC)

Horton CBI Ltd. v. Assess. Commr. (1986), 13 O.A.C. 318 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

In The Matter Of an appeal from the decision of the Ontario Municipal Board dated the 23rd day of December, 1982, with respect to the assessments returned for taxation in 1979, 1980 and 1981 with respect to the assessment of premises known municipally as 40 Jennet Street East, in the Town of Fort Erie, more particularly being assessment roll numbers: 27 03 010 047 023 00 0000; 27 03 010 047 023 00 0010

Horton CBI Limited v. Regional Assessment Commissioner, Region No. 18 and The Corporation of the Town of Fort Erie

(No. 76/83)

Indexed As: Horton CBI Ltd. v. Regional Assessment Commissioner, Region No. 18 and Fort Erie (Town)

Ontario Divisional Court

Callaghan, A.C.J.H.C., Steele and O'Brien, JJ.

March 3, 1986.

Summary:

Horton's lands and buildings were assessed for taxes. In determining the assessment, no depreciation was allowed for the buildings subsequent to 1960. The assessor justified this because the assessment roll had been frozen by legislation. The owner appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. The Board dismissed the appeal and confirmed the assessment. The owner appealed.

The Ontario Divisional Court allowed the appeal and held that the Board erred. The court returned the matter to the Board for its determination.

Real Property Tax - Topic 5307

Valuation - Principles - Uniformity - Effect of assessments on properties comparable to the taxpayer's property being lower than the taxpayer's assessment - Where freeze on tax assessments in effect - The Assessment Act (Ont.) placed a freeze on tax assessments in certain years - Despite the freeze, if events altered property values, creating inequities among similar properties in the same vicinity, the Municipal Board and the assessors could alter the assessments to reduce inequities - The Ontario Divisional Court held that failure to allow chronological depreciation created an inequity that may be altered by the assessor or on appeal.

Cases Noticed:

Peel Condominium No. 57 et al. v. Regional Assessment Commissioner, Assessment Region No. 15 et al. (1984), 5 O.A.C. 358; 47 O.R.(2d) 466, consd. [para. 4].

Statutes Noticed:

Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 31, sect. 62, sect. 63 [para. 4].

Counsel:

P.A. Milligan and Sally Lomas, for the appellants;

J.A. Crossingham, for the respondents.

This appeal was heard before Callaghan, A.C.J.H.C., Steele and O'Brien, JJ., of the Ontario Divisional Court on February 26, 1986. The decision of the Divisional Court was delivered by Steele, J., and released on March 3, 1986