Li v Lin
Last updated: February 7, 2026
Order
Ordered by Harry Cho,Tribunals Ontario under Section 21.2, Statutory Powers Procedure Act and the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006
Decision in favor of
Tenant
Previous Order
Upheld
Dispute Categories
Subsections of RTA Quoted
Agree with the ruling?
Citation: Li v Lin, 2025 ONLTB 43370
File Number: LTB-L-030252-24-RV
Timeline
Hearing Date
Feb 2025
Order Date
Jun 3, 2025
Decision
The Landlord's request for a review of the order dated May 5, 2025, is denied. The original order remains confirmed and unchanged, meaning the findings regarding the Tenant's lack of responsibility for water utility charges stand.
Dispute
The Landlord requested a review of a previous order (LTB-L-030252-24) which had determined that the Tenant was not responsible for paying water utility charges. The Landlord claimed they were not reasonably able to participate and that a serious error had occurred. The adjudicator found that the Landlord was represented by legal counsel at the original hearing, the decision regarding utilities was based on available evidence, and the Landlord failed to justify why allegedly 'new' evidence was not presented earlier.
Determinations
- Landlord was represented by counsel and participated in the original hearing
- No serious error occurred in the proceeding or the original order
- Lease agreement does not require the Tenant to pay water utility charges
- Evidence the Landlord wished to introduce did not meet the legal criteria for 'fresh evidence'
- Procedural fairness was afforded to both parties
Landlord's Arguments
Arguments
The Landlord argued they were not reasonably able to participate in the original hearing and that the previous member made a serious error regarding water utility responsibility.
Actions and Evidence
The Landlord attempted to introduce evidence after the hearing was closed to challenge the Tenant's submissions.
Procedural Errors
The Landlord failed to disclose and introduce evidence during the actual hearing despite being present with representation.
Tenant's Arguments
Arguments
The Tenant argued that the lease agreement does not mandate payment for water utilities.
Actions and Evidence
The Tenant entered an exhibit at the original hearing demonstrating that they were not required to pay water bills.
Similar Cases
Click to switch between order outcomes
Algoma District Services Administration Board v Martel
The LTB issued an ex parte order terminating a tenancy and ordering eviction after the tenant breached the conditions of a previous order.
Smith v Lee
An LTB order awards a Landlord unpaid water charges and filing fees after the Tenant vacates the rental unit.
Downey-Thomas v Lacson
The Tenant's application alleging illegal entry, substantial interference, and harassment was dismissed because it failed to provide dates and particulars for the alleged conduct, violating principles of procedural fairness.
Old Oak Properties Inc. v Last
The Landlord established substantial interference due to excessive communications, but relief from eviction was granted allowing the tenancy to continue on conditions.
Algoma District Services Administration Board v Martel
The LTB issued an ex parte order terminating a tenancy and ordering eviction after the tenant breached the conditions of a previous order.
Smith v Lee
An LTB order awards a Landlord unpaid water charges and filing fees after the Tenant vacates the rental unit.
Downey-Thomas v Lacson
The Tenant's application alleging illegal entry, substantial interference, and harassment was dismissed because it failed to provide dates and particulars for the alleged conduct, violating principles of procedural fairness.
Old Oak Properties Inc. v Last
The Landlord established substantial interference due to excessive communications, but relief from eviction was granted allowing the tenancy to continue on conditions.
Algoma District Services Administration Board v Martel
The LTB issued an ex parte order terminating a tenancy and ordering eviction after the tenant breached the conditions of a previous order.
Smith v Lee
An LTB order awards a Landlord unpaid water charges and filing fees after the Tenant vacates the rental unit.
Downey-Thomas v Lacson
The Tenant's application alleging illegal entry, substantial interference, and harassment was dismissed because it failed to provide dates and particulars for the alleged conduct, violating principles of procedural fairness.
Old Oak Properties Inc. v Last
The Landlord established substantial interference due to excessive communications, but relief from eviction was granted allowing the tenancy to continue on conditions.
Algoma District Services Administration Board v Martel
The LTB issued an ex parte order terminating a tenancy and ordering eviction after the tenant breached the conditions of a previous order.
Smith v Lee
An LTB order awards a Landlord unpaid water charges and filing fees after the Tenant vacates the rental unit.
Downey-Thomas v Lacson
The Tenant's application alleging illegal entry, substantial interference, and harassment was dismissed because it failed to provide dates and particulars for the alleged conduct, violating principles of procedural fairness.
Old Oak Properties Inc. v Last
The Landlord established substantial interference due to excessive communications, but relief from eviction was granted allowing the tenancy to continue on conditions.
Twaseen v Zhang
The tenant's application alleging substantial interference and harassment was withdrawn upon request and the file was closed.
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.
Celik v Celik
The LTB dismissed the tenant's application because the Residential Tenancies Act did not apply due to the shared use of kitchen and bathroom facilities with the landlord and the landlord's mother.
Savannah Land Corporation v Dickerson
The LTB granted relief from eviction and allowed the tenancy to continue on strict conditions after finding the tenant substantially interfered with a neighbor's enjoyment by encroaching on shared space.
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