Divisional Court Upholds Landlord's Obligation to Repay Illegal Rent Increases to Tenants: Sapershteyn et al v. 1821317 Ontario Limited et al 2023
Divisional Court upholds Landlord and Tenant Board order requiring landlord to repay tenants for illegal rent increases
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: August 6, 2024
Case Summary
87 Wade Avenue, Toronto, ON
Decision in favor of
tenant
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date
Dec 2022
Hearing Date
Oct 2023
Order Date
Oct 31, 2023
Dispute Summary
Landlords appealed a decision of the Landlord and Tenant Board that Section 135.1 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 did not apply to the unlawful rent increases charged to the tenants. The Board ordered the landlords to pay the tenants the unlawful rent increases.
Determinations
- Landlords charged illegal rent and improperly collected HST from tenants
- Tenants paid the illegal rent for 12 consecutive months
- Validity of rent increases was finally determined by May 26, 2020 endorsement
- Landlords did not comply with May 26, 2020 directive to confirm rent figures
Case Study
The Divisional Court found that the Board did not err in its interpretation of Section 135.1 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006. However, the Court found that the Board erred in its characterization of the purpose of the section, which was to limit the availability to tenants to seek and obtain payment of illegal rent charged. The Court held that the Board's application of the facts to the law was a question of mixed fact and law, and that deference should be given to the Board's assessment.
Decision Summary
The Divisional Court dismissed the landlords' appeal of the Board's order to repay the tenants the unlawful rent increases, finding that the Board's application of the facts to the law was a question of mixed fact and law, and that deference should be given to the Board's assessment.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
3
Landlord Favorable
0.0%
Tenant Favorable
66.7%
Mutual Agreement
33.3%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
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.