BCIMC Realty v Samson: Tenant's Review Request Denied - 2024 ONLTB 37956
LTB Denies Tenant's Review in BCIMC Realty v Samson Case
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 22, 2024
Case Summary
Unit ****, 44 Jackes Avenue, Toronto, ON M4T1E5
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Apr 2024
Order Date
May 17, 2024
Dispute Summary
Landlord applied for an order to terminate the tenancy and evict Tenant due to failure to meet a condition specified in a previous Board order. The Tenant filed a motion to set aside an ex parte order, which was denied. The Tenant then requested a review of the motion order, which was also denied.
Determinations
- Board Vice Chair correctly applied legal principles from Wang v. Oloo
- Decision to deny adjournment request was rational and within reasonable range of outcomes
- Tenant did not provide sufficient evidence to justify adjournment
- Tenant failed to demonstrate inability to participate in the proceeding
Case Study
The Vice Chair's decision to deny the adjournment request was found to be rational and not arbitrary. The Tenant failed to provide sufficient evidence to show they were not reasonably able to participate in the proceeding. The decision was consistent with the duty to adopt an expeditious procedure to resolve the application.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Actions
Landlord opposed the Tenant's legal representative's request to adjourn the hearing.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant's legal representative requested an adjournment to allow the Tenant to attend and participate in the proceeding on another day.
Actions
Tenant and Tenant's legal representative received notice of the April 9, 2024 motion hearing, but only the legal representative attended. The Tenant did not introduce sufficient material to show they were not reasonably able to participate in the proceeding.
Procedural Errors
Tenant failed to provide sufficient evidence to justify their absence and support the adjournment request.
Decision Summary
The Tenant's request to review the April 17, 2024 motion order was denied. The original order, which denied the Tenant's motion to set aside the April 11, 2021 ex parte order, remains unchanged.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
611
Landlord Favorable
83.8%
Tenant Favorable
6.7%
Mutual Agreement
9.5%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Source
Similar Cases
Click to switch between case outcomes
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Goklani v Cannata
Toronto tenants' maintenance dispute against landlord dismissed by LTB
Jeff v Ferguson
Woodstock landlords awarded $35,186 in rent arrears, tenants face eviction for non-payment.
Oxford Properties Group v Benjamin
Tenant ordered to pay $22,461.70 for flood damage with conditional tenancy preservation
Sufi Properties Ltd v Nieman
Tenants ordered to pay $16,866 in rent arrears to Former Landlord after complex dispute.