Property owners alleged that overdevelopment increases risk and reduced property values
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice approved a settlement for a class action lawsuit filed by Oakville property owners, who alleged that overdevelopment increased flood risk and reduced property values.
The class action, led by plaintiff Edwin Banfi, argued that the defendants' development decisions since 1986 expanded the floodplain and heightened flood risks for properties within Burloak Drive, Lake Ontario, Winston Churchill Boulevard, and Dundas Street. The action specifically addressed 1,643 homes within this “Regulatory Flood Hazard” (RFH) area, which are particularly susceptible to flooding during regional storms.
The lawsuit initially focused on the impact of flood risk on property values. However, the plaintiff's investigation revealed complications. Many property owners were unaware their properties were in the RFH, and numerous properties were bought and sold multiple times during the class period, making it challenging to determine damages.
Most Read
Moreover, the plaintiff’s water resource engineer acknowledged that multiple factors contribute to flood risk, requiring individual property assessments.
Given these difficulties, the focus shifted to raising public awareness about RFH risks and initiating flood risk reduction measures. As part of the settlement, the defendants will fund the Oakville Home Flood Education and Protection Program, developed by the Intact Centre. This program will inform homeowners about flood resilience measures and conduct community outreach.
Barbara Medeiros was the sole objector to the proposed settlement. She expressed concerns that the settlement did not address existing flooding issues or support individual homeowners with associated costs. However, the plaintiff's counsel concluded that her flooding issues were due to construction deficiencies rather than the expanded floodplain. Consequently, she will be deemed an opt-out, preserving her right to pursue further action.
The Superior Court found the settlement fair and reasonable, emphasizing the action's role in elevating public awareness and the benefits of the education and protection program. The court recognized the complexities in determining the cause of the RFH expansion and quantifying individual damages, making a direct monetary distribution to class members impractical.
Ultimately, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice approved the proposed settlement, recognizing its benefits in reducing flood risk, promoting access to justice, and encouraging behaviour modification among the defendants.
