Divisional Court Upholds LTB Decision: Guillaume v. Barney Rivers Investments Ltd
Divisional Court upholds LTB decision, ruling audio recordings unnecessary when witness present for oral testimony
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: August 16, 2024
Case Summary
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed to Landlord
$1,000
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Apr 2022
Order Date
Apr 13, 2022
Dispute Summary
The Appellant (Tenant) appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board order that found she was not a tenant of the rental unit and therefore the Residential Tenancies Act did not apply. The Appellant alleged that the Board erred in law by not allowing her to play certain recordings she had filed of a witness, Barbara O'Connor, which she claimed resulted in a denial of procedural fairness.
Determinations
- Board's refusal to allow audio recordings was a discretionary evidentiary ruling
- Witness gave oral evidence under oath and was questioned by both parties
- Not permitting audio recordings when participants are present for oral evidence is not a breach of procedural fairness
- No bias or reasonable apprehension of bias demonstrated
Case Study
The Divisional Court found that the Board's decision to not allow the audio recordings was an evidentiary ruling within its discretion. Such rulings can only be set aside if they display an error in principle or were clearly wrong. The Court noted that the witness in question gave oral evidence under oath and was questioned by both parties, making the audio recordings unnecessary. The Court concluded that not permitting the audio recordings when both participants were present to give oral evidence did not breach procedural fairness or demonstrate bias.
Arguments and Actions
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued that not allowing the audio recordings resulted in a denial of procedural fairness.
Actions
Tenant attempted to introduce audio recordings of a witness who was present at the hearing.
Procedural Errors
Tenant failed to properly challenge witness testimony with alleged inconsistencies from audio recordings.
Decision Summary
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the Board's decision to not allow the audio recordings. The Court ordered the Appellant to pay the Landlord $1,000 in costs for the appeal.
Adjudicator Details
Divisional Court
Total Orders
21
Landlord Favorable
71.4%
Tenant Favorable
28.6%
Mutual Agreement
0.0%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Other Owed Amount
$1,000
Appeal costs
Total Owing
$1,000 (Owed to Landlord)
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.