Chang, Global Properties v Whissell
Last updated: August 16, 2024
Order
Agree with the ruling?
Citation: Chang, Global Properties v Whissell, 2017 ONSC 3691
File Number: EAT-45246-14
Timeline
Hearing Date
Jun 2017
Order Date
Jun 14, 2017
Decision
The Divisional Court dismissed the landlords' appeal of the Landlord and Tenant Board's decision. The court ruled that the appeal was not properly before it because the corporate landlord, Global Properties Limited, was not represented by a lawyer as required by Rule 15.01(2) of the Rules of Civil Procedure. The court refused to grant an adjournment to allow the landlords to bring a motion for leave to represent the corporation, noting that Mr. Chang was aware of the rule but chose not to comply. As a result, the Board's original order requiring the landlord to pay the tenant $5,829.91 for maintenance issues remains in effect.
Dispute
Tenant applied to the Landlord and Tenant Board for an order determining that the landlord failed to meet maintenance obligations or comply with health, safety, housing or maintenance standards. The Board amended the application to name Global Properties Limited as the landlord instead of Nathan Chang, and ordered the company to pay the tenant $5,829.91. The landlords appealed the Board's decision to the Divisional Court.
Determinations
- The appeal was not properly before the court due to lack of legal representation for the corporate landlord
- Mr. Chang had no standing to represent the corporation
- The request for adjournment was denied
Landlord's Arguments
Arguments
Mr. Chang argued that the Board's Notice of Hearing 'did not come to the attention of Global Properties Limited because the registered letter named Nathan Chang, not Global Properties'. He insisted that the corporation had no notice of the application or the hearing.
Actions and Evidence
Mr. Chang admits that in his personal capacity he received the Notice of Hearing and the tenant's application. However, he asserts that his personal knowledge cannot be imputed to the corporation.
Procedural Errors
The landlords failed to comply with Rule 15.01(2) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires a corporation to be represented by a lawyer in legal proceedings, except with leave of the court.
Tenant's Arguments
Arguments
The tenant successfully argued before the Landlord and Tenant Board that the landlord failed to meet maintenance obligations.
Actions and Evidence
Tenant applied to the Landlord and Tenant Board for an order determining that the landlord failed to meet maintenance obligations or comply with health, safety, housing or maintenance standards.
Similar Cases
Click to switch between order outcomes
Smith v Lee
An LTB order awards a Landlord unpaid water charges and filing fees after the Tenant vacates the rental unit.
The LTB dismissed a tenant's review request regarding a maintenance order, finding no serious errors in the original proceeding.
Kong v 2** Jarvis LP
The Landlord and Tenant Board denied the tenant's review request, confirming the dismissal of the tenant's applications for failing to comply with interim disclosure and amendment orders.
The LTB found the Landlord delayed in addressing a cockroach infestation, awarding the Tenant hotel expenses and filing fees, but permitted the Landlord to set off these amounts against larger debts owed by the Tenant under prior orders.
Smith v Lee
An LTB order awards a Landlord unpaid water charges and filing fees after the Tenant vacates the rental unit.
The LTB dismissed a tenant's review request regarding a maintenance order, finding no serious errors in the original proceeding.
Kong v 2** Jarvis LP
The Landlord and Tenant Board denied the tenant's review request, confirming the dismissal of the tenant's applications for failing to comply with interim disclosure and amendment orders.
The LTB found the Landlord delayed in addressing a cockroach infestation, awarding the Tenant hotel expenses and filing fees, but permitted the Landlord to set off these amounts against larger debts owed by the Tenant under prior orders.
Smith v Lee
An LTB order awards a Landlord unpaid water charges and filing fees after the Tenant vacates the rental unit.
The LTB dismissed a tenant's review request regarding a maintenance order, finding no serious errors in the original proceeding.
Kong v 2** Jarvis LP
The Landlord and Tenant Board denied the tenant's review request, confirming the dismissal of the tenant's applications for failing to comply with interim disclosure and amendment orders.
The LTB found the Landlord delayed in addressing a cockroach infestation, awarding the Tenant hotel expenses and filing fees, but permitted the Landlord to set off these amounts against larger debts owed by the Tenant under prior orders.
Smith v Lee
An LTB order awards a Landlord unpaid water charges and filing fees after the Tenant vacates the rental unit.
The LTB dismissed a tenant's review request regarding a maintenance order, finding no serious errors in the original proceeding.
Kong v 2** Jarvis LP
The Landlord and Tenant Board denied the tenant's review request, confirming the dismissal of the tenant's applications for failing to comply with interim disclosure and amendment orders.
The LTB found the Landlord delayed in addressing a cockroach infestation, awarding the Tenant hotel expenses and filing fees, but permitted the Landlord to set off these amounts against larger debts owed by the Tenant under prior orders.
C***** Barrientos v Sherritt
An LTB order dismisses a tenant's T2 application for substantial interference, maintenance failures, and harassment after finding the allegations unproven.
Kong v 2** Jarvis LP
The LTB denied the tenant's review request, finding no procedural unfairness or serious error in the original dismissal of the tenant's maintenance and service reduction applications.
Telli v Sterling Karamar Property Management
The Tenant withdrew their maintenance application at the hearing, and the LTB closed the file.
Boucetta v Metcap Living Management Inc.
The tenant's request for review of a maintenance order was dismissed because the adjudicator found no serious error in the original decision.
Latest Insights from Our Blog
Stay informed with expert analysis on rental law, tenant rights, and LTB decisions
London, Ontario Tenant Paralegals: How to Find LTB Representation and Defend Your Rights (2026)
Facing eviction or landlord harassment in London, Ontario? Learn what tenant paralegals do at the LTB, when to hire one, and meet Southwestern Ontario advocates ranked by real tribunal records.
Toronto Tenant Paralegals: How to Find LTB Representation and Defend Your Rights (2026)
Facing eviction or landlord harassment in Toronto? Learn what tenant paralegals do at the LTB, when to hire one, and meet experienced GTA advocates ranked by real tribunal case records.
When Landlords Cry Wolf: Analyzing False Claims and Bad Faith Applications at the LTB
A comprehensive analysis of dismissed landlord applications, bad faith eviction attempts, and frivolous claims reveals the consequences when property owners abuse the LTB system.
Need Legal Help? We've Got You Covered
Whether you need to find qualified legal professionals or post your specific legal needs to get competitive quotes, our platform connects you with the right help.
Find Legal Professionals
Browse our directory of verified paralegals and lawyers specializing in Ontario rental law and LTB matters.
Browse ProfessionalsPost Your Legal Needs
Describe your legal situation and receive competitive quotes from qualified professionals in our marketplace.
Post a BountyJoin thousands of Ontarians who have found legal help through our platform