Divisional Court Clarifies Appellant Responsibilities in LTB Appeals: Collins v. McCarthy
Divisional Court clarifies tenant's responsibilities in LTB appeal process, dismissing motion for LTB to produce transcripts
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: August 16, 2024
Case Summary
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Feb 2018
Order Date
Feb 5, 2018
Dispute Summary
Tenant appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board decision to the Divisional Court. Tenant brought a motion requesting the LTB to produce transcripts and documentary evidence from the original hearing. The court dismissed the motion, ruling that it is the appellant's responsibility to order transcripts and prepare the appeal book.
Determinations
- Appellant is responsible for ordering transcripts and preparing appeal book
- LTB is not required to produce transcripts or records for an appeal
- Appeal adjourned to allow appellant to comply with Rules of Civil Procedure
Case Study
The court clarified that it is the appellant's responsibility to order transcripts and prepare the appeal book as per the Rules of Civil Procedure. The Landlord and Tenant Board is not required to produce these materials for an appeal, unlike in a judicial review application.
Arguments and Actions
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued that Rule 61.09(2) of the Rules of Civil Procedure and s. 20(d) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act require the Landlord and Tenant Board to produce the transcripts and record.
Actions
Tenant filed an appeal of an LTB decision and brought a motion requesting the LTB to produce transcripts and documentary evidence.
Procedural Errors
Tenant misinterpreted the rules regarding the responsibility for ordering transcripts and preparing the appeal book.
Decision Summary
The court dismissed the tenant's motion requesting the Landlord and Tenant Board to produce transcripts and documentary evidence. The court ruled that it is the appellant's responsibility to order transcripts and prepare the appeal book according to the Rules of Civil Procedure. The appeal was adjourned to allow the appellant 30 days to comply with the rules.
Adjudicator Details
Divisional Court
Total Orders
6
Landlord Favorable
66.7%
Tenant Favorable
33.3%
Mutual Agreement
0.0%
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.