Divisional Court Upholds LTB Eviction Order: Linhares v. Rahman, 2023 ONSC 1435
Divisional Court quashes tenant's appeal of LTB eviction order, upholding landlord's right to reclaim property for personal use
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
Sep 2022
Hearing Date
Feb 2023
Order Date
Mar 2, 2023
Dispute Summary
Tenant appealed an LTB decision that terminated the tenancy and ordered eviction based on the landlord's claim of requiring the unit for personal use. The Divisional Court quashed the appeal, finding no question of law was raised.
Determinations
- Appeal raises no question of law
- LTB Member's findings were based on evidence
- No procedural fairness issue affected the outcome
- Landlord could validly use s. 48(1) of RTA for personal use notice
Case Study
The court found that the tenant's grounds for appeal did not raise questions of law, which is required for an appeal from an LTB decision. The court determined that the tenant's arguments essentially disagreed with the LTB Member's findings of fact, which are outside the court's jurisdiction in such appeals.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlord argued that the appeal should be quashed as it failed to raise a question of law, which is required for appeals from LTB decisions.
Actions
Landlord gave notice of termination under s. 48(1) of the RTA, claiming to require possession of the rental unit for residential occupation for at least one year.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued that the LTB Member made errors in law by not properly considering evidence and failing to apply certain sections of the RTA.
Actions
Tenant appealed the LTB decision, arguing that the Member failed to apply s. 71.1(3) of the RTA, did not properly consider prior N12 notices, failed to consider evidence of reprisal, and failed to consider the absence of evidence supporting the landlord's application.
Decision Summary
The Divisional Court quashed the tenant's appeal of the LTB decision, finding that no question of law was raised. The court upheld the LTB's order terminating the tenancy and evicting the tenant. The automatic stay of the LTB's order was lifted, effective March 17, 2023, to allow the tenant time to vacate the premises.
Adjudicator Details
Divisional Court
Total Orders
7
Landlord Favorable
57.1%
Tenant Favorable
14.3%
Mutual Agreement
28.6%
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.