Neighbour must pay $390K in damages for flooded property: Appeal Court

TORONTO — An intransigent property owner whose improvements to his rural land caused years of flooding to the adjacent lot must pay his distressed neighbour a hefty award, Ontario’s top court ruled Monday.

In upholding the $390,000 award against Graziano Biadi, the Court of Appeal said the amount was reasonable given his years of misconduct at the expense of neighbour, Matthew Weenen.

“The record clearly shows (Biadi) to be a bully who, for over a decade, repeatedly took steps designed to increase the value of his property knowing the harm these steps were causing to the respondent’s property and to the respondent personally,” the Appeal Court said in its ruling.

Court records show Biadi bought his property just north of Ajax, Ont., in 2001. Starting in 2002, Biadi began adding fill to raise the property’s elevation to allow it to be used for farming. Ultimately, he dumped thousands of truckloads of material on the property.

The problem, however, was that the changes resulted in severe flooding to Weenen’s property next door, and set off an ugly dispute between the neighbours.

update

Mistrial declared in case against Red Deer massage therapist

17m ago

Rev it!

City of Red Deer offers free decibel reading event this Saturday

34m ago

October 2024 Trial

Trial date set for employee charged in alleged Didsbury care home assault

57m ago

Evidence was also that Biadi improperly dug a drainage ditch that only made matters worse. He obstructed and failed to maintain a culvert under his driveway despite being told it was blocked and was increasing the flooding.

“On two occasions, the appellant was caught on camera deliberately blocking the culvert,” the Appeal Court found.

In November 2015, Superior Court Justice David Salmers ruled in favour of Weenen, who had sued for damages. Weenen alleged negligence and nuisance.

In his decision, Salmers found Biadi’s conduct had “greatly increased the amount and speed of surface water” draining across the Weenen lands, resulting in extensive flooding. He also ruled Biadi was not credible as a witness.

“He was often evasive,” Salmers said. “Often his testimony just did not make sense.”

Ultimately, the trial judge awarded Weenen $250,000 in general damages related to the loss of use and enjoyment of his lands, including his frequently flooded workshop, and $15,000 for water damage to his chicken coop.

Salmers also awarded Weenen another $125,000 in punitive damages given Biadi’s “egregious” behaviour that had caused his neighbour severe stress and stress-related problems.

“It is very hard to imagine how difficult it has been for Mr. Weenen to live in these conditions for such a long time,” Salmers wrote. “For days on end, every year, he has seen this flooding on his lands, he has been unable to do anything about it, and he has known that his lands and sometimes some buildings were unusable as a result.”

Biadi, who did not dispute the judge’s liability finding, appealed the amount of damages as excessive.

The Appeal Court found no reason to interfere, saying the award of general damages was supported by the evidence, and that punitive damages were “clearly warranted.”

“The amount of $125,000 for deterrence purposes is entirely reasonable,” the Appeal Court said.

The court also awarded Weenen $50,000 in legal costs.

Colin Perkel, The Canadian Press