Divisional Court Upholds LTB Eviction: Ladowsky v. Chernyshova, 2024 ONSC 3623
Divisional Court dismisses tenant's appeal of LTB personal use eviction, citing lack of legal questions raised
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
Mar 2024
Application Date
Mar 2024
Hearing Date
Jun 2024
Order Date
Jun 24, 2024
Dispute Summary
Tenant appealed LTB decision terminating tenancy for landlord's personal use. Divisional Court dismissed appeal as frivolous, finding no question of law raised.
Determinations
- Appeal does not raise questions of law
- LTB's factual findings on landlord's good faith and compensation payment were reasonable
- Tenant's appeal is frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process
Case Study
The court found that the tenant's grounds for appeal did not raise questions of law, which is required for appeals from LTB decisions to the Divisional Court. The issues raised were factual matters already decided by the LTB.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlord argued that the compensation was properly paid, taking into account the tenant's attempts to frustrate the payment process and the waiver of rent arrears.
Actions
Landlord testified that she required the unit for her son, who was recently married and expecting a child. Landlord's husband informed the tenant about the situation and provided the N12 form.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued that the landlord failed to prove the rental unit was not owned by a corporation. Tenant also claimed the landlord had not properly paid the required compensation.
Actions
Tenant alleged the N12 notice was suspicious due to a recent maintenance request. Tenant also argued it was unreasonable for a couple with an infant to live in a one-bedroom apartment.
Procedural Errors
Tenant failed to raise a question of law in the appeal, which is required for appeals from LTB decisions to the Divisional Court.
Decision Summary
The Divisional Court dismissed the tenant's appeal of the LTB decision terminating the tenancy for the landlord's personal use. The court found that the appeal did not raise any questions of law and was therefore frivolous and an abuse of process. The eviction order was upheld, with the tenant required to vacate by August 10, 2024.
Adjudicator Details
Divisional Court
Total Orders
17
Landlord Favorable
76.5%
Tenant Favorable
11.8%
Mutual Agreement
11.8%
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.