Costs Awarded in Singh v. Balogun: Landlord Wins Appeal Dismissal
Landlord awarded $1250 in costs after court quashes tenants' meritless appeal of eviction order
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: August 16, 2024
Case Summary
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed to Landlord
$1,250
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Order Date
Jan 24, 2019
Dispute Summary
Tenants appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board order terminating their tenancy. Landlord brought a motion to quash the appeal, which was granted by the court. This decision concerns the costs of that motion.
Determinations
- Tenants' appeal was on a question of fact or mixed fact and law
- No right of appeal existed for the tenants' case
- The appeal lacked merit
- Landlord is entitled to reasonable partial indemnity costs
- A punitive costs award is not warranted in this case
Case Study
The court found that the tenants' appeal was on a question of fact or mixed fact and law, for which there is no right of appeal. The appeal was also found to be devoid of merit. However, the court did not make a finding on whether the appeal was a delaying tactic to avoid eviction and rent payment.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlord argued for substantial indemnity costs due to the appeal being meritless, a delaying tactic, and not diligently pursued by the tenants.
Actions
Landlord brought a motion to quash the tenants' appeal and sought substantial indemnity costs of $8,065.47.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenants argued they properly defended their rights as tenants and should not be punished for seeking access to justice.
Actions
Tenants appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board order terminating their tenancy, despite the appeal being on a question of fact or mixed fact and law for which there is no right of appeal.
Procedural Errors
Tenants filed an appeal on a matter of fact or mixed fact and law, for which there is no right of appeal.
Decision Summary
The court awarded costs of $1,250 to the landlord, all inclusive of fees, disbursements, and taxes. This was less than the substantial indemnity costs of $8,065.47 requested by the landlord. The court found that while the tenants' appeal lacked merit, a punitive costs award was not warranted as the tenants were entitled to their day in court.
Adjudicator Details
Superior Court of Justice
Total Orders
4
Landlord Favorable
50.0%
Tenant Favorable
25.0%
Mutual Agreement
25.0%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Other Owed Amount
$1,250
Costs awarded to landlord
Total Owing
$1,250 (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.