Fisher v. Michel: Divisional Court Upholds LTB Personal Use Eviction
Divisional Court upholds LTB decision allowing landlord's personal use eviction, confirming good faith test and procedural fairness
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: August 16, 2024
Case Summary
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Tenancy End Date
Nov 2021
Hearing Date
Nov 2022
Order Date
Nov 28, 2022
Dispute Summary
The landlord applied to terminate the tenancy and evict the tenant for personal use of the rental unit. The tenant appealed the Landlord and Tenant Board's decision granting the landlord's application to the Divisional Court.
Determinations
- The Landlord and Tenant Board made no reviewable error of law
- The test for good faith in personal use applications is a genuine intention to occupy, not reasonableness
- There was no breach of procedural fairness in denying the tenant's adjournment request
- The landlord's evidence was sufficient to establish good faith intention to personally occupy the unit
- The tenant was afforded adequate opportunity to present his case
Case Study
The Divisional Court found no reviewable error of law in the Landlord and Tenant Board's decision. The court confirmed that the test for good faith in personal use applications is whether the landlord has a genuine intention to occupy the unit, not whether their decision is reasonable. The court also found no breach of procedural fairness in denying the tenant's adjournment request.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
The landlord argued that she genuinely required the rental unit for her own personal use due to her age and medical conditions.
Actions
The landlord and her husband are in their late seventies. The landlord has medical conditions and takes medication that requires frequent use of the upstairs bathroom. She uses a CPAP machine for sleeping and wants her own bedroom and the benefit of a second washroom.
Tenant
Arguments
The tenant argued that the landlord could use other vacant units on the second floor instead of evicting him. He also claimed that the landlord's application was grounded in fraud and that he was denied procedural fairness when his adjournment request was refused.
Actions
The tenant seldom slept in the unit and only came to collect mail from time to time. He did not have many possessions in the unit.
Aggravating Factors
The tenant threatened to smear the landlord's family business on the web.
Decision Summary
The Divisional Court dismissed the tenant's appeal of the Landlord and Tenant Board's decision terminating the tenancy for the landlord's personal use. The court found no reviewable error of law in the Board's decision and confirmed that the test for good faith in personal use applications is whether the landlord has a genuine intention to occupy the unit, not whether their decision is reasonable.
Adjudicator Details
Divisional Court
Total Orders
1
Landlord Favorable
100.0%
Tenant Favorable
0.0%
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.