Shearer v. Oz: Divisional Court Upholds LTB Eviction Order
Divisional Court upholds LTB eviction order despite maintenance issues, emphasizing tenants' obligation to pay rent
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: August 16, 2024
Case Summary
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed to Landlord
$27,565
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date (Estimate)
Aug 2021
Hearing Date
Sep 2023
Order Date
Mar 27, 2024
We estimate Application Date using rent arrears.
Dispute Summary
Tenants appealed and sought judicial review of an LTB decision that ordered termination of tenancy and eviction due to non-payment of rent, while also awarding rent abatements for maintenance issues. The Tenants argued the LTB erred in its decision and raised issues of procedural fairness and bias.
Determinations
- LTB's decision on s.83(3) of RTA was reasonable
- Dismissal of A1 application was correct
- LTB's interpretation of s.27 of RTA was largely correct
- No breach of natural justice or procedural fairness
- No reasonable apprehension of bias
Case Study
The court found no errors of law in the LTB's decision. It held that the LTB reasonably concluded the Landlords' breaches were not 'serious' under s.83(1) of the RTA, correctly interpreted s.27 on landlord entry, and provided sufficient reasons for its decision. The court dismissed claims of procedural unfairness and bias.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlords argued that their breaches were not 'serious' under s.83(3) of the RTA and that they had made efforts to address maintenance issues.
Actions
Landlords failed to properly maintain the property, particularly regarding heating and insulation issues.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenants argued that the LTB erred in interpreting s.83(3) and s.27 of the RTA, failed to properly consider the Human Rights Code, breached natural justice, and showed bias.
Actions
Tenants stopped paying rent from December 2020 onwards, even after previously paying arrears to void an eviction order. They vacated the property in July 2019 but retained keys and claimed to still be in possession.
Procedural Errors
Tenants adopted a highly technical and litigious approach to the LTB proceedings, pursuing trivialities alongside substantial issues.
Aggravating Factors
Tenants failed to pay rent for extended periods, even after bringing arrears up-to-date, and pursued numerous insubstantial arguments before the LTB.
Decision Summary
The Divisional Court dismissed both the appeal and application for judicial review of the LTB decision. The court found no errors of law, no breach of procedural fairness, and no reasonable apprehension of bias in the LTB's decision. The court upheld the LTB's order for termination of tenancy and eviction due to non-payment of rent, as well as the rent abatements awarded for maintenance issues.
Adjudicator Details
Divisional Court
Total Orders
19
Landlord Favorable
79.0%
Tenant Favorable
15.8%
Mutual Agreement
5.3%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Lawful Rent
$2,106
Rent Arrears
$54,375
Total Owing
$27,565 (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.