Samuel Szu en Tam and Yu-ying Liao v Tracey Playne

Last updated: August 8, 2025

Order

Ordered by Renée Lang,Tribunals Ontario  under Section 21.2, Statutory Powers Procedure Act

Order Date: March 17, 2025
*** Esther Dr, Barrie, ON L4N9T1
Contested Dispute
Review Order

Decision in favor of

Landlord

Previous Order

Upheld

Subsections of RTA Quoted

21.2
ContentionHigh

Agree with the ruling?

Citation: Samuel Szu en Tam and Yu-ying Liao v Tracey Playne, LTB-L-090854-24-SA-RV

File Number: LTB-L-090854-24-SA-RV

Timeline

Order Date

Mar 17, 2025

Decision

The Tenant's request to review order LTB-L-090854-24-SA is denied. The previous order, which upheld the Tenant's eviction for breaching a prior condition, is confirmed and remains unchanged. The Board found the hearing Member's denial of the Tenant's adjournment request, based on an unsubstantiated claim of a bedbug infestation, was not a serious error.

Unlock Order Content

Dispute

The Tenant requested a review of an order that had denied her motion to set aside an eviction. The eviction was based on the Tenant's failure to meet a condition from a prior order. The Tenant argued the Member erred by denying her request for an adjournment at the set-aside hearing, a request she made claiming a severe bedbug infestation had prevented her from sleeping. The Board denied the Tenant's review request, finding no serious error.

Unlock Order Content

Determinations

  • The Tenant requested an adjournment at a set-aside hearing, claiming she had been awake for 48 hours due to a severe bedbug infestation.
  • The hearing Member denied the adjournment request.
  • Adjournment decisions are discretionary and will only be overturned on review if found to be unreasonable.
  • The Member's decision to deny the adjournment was not an unreasonable exercise of discretion.
  • The Tenant's claim of a sudden, severe bedbug infestation was unsubstantiated and deemed 'extraordinary'.
  • Denying the adjournment was reasonable to avoid further prejudice to the Landlords.
  • The Tenant was not reasonably unable to participate in the proceeding.
  • There was no serious error in the order or the proceedings.
  • Unlock Order Content

Landlord's Arguments

Arguments

The Landlords' position, supported by the Board, was that further delays in the proceeding would be prejudicial to them.

Unlock Order Content

Actions and Evidence

The Landlords initiated proceedings because the Tenant failed to meet a condition from a prior Board order. They were subject to multiple delay attempts by the Tenant.

Unlock Order Content

Tenant's Arguments

Arguments

The Tenant argued that the Member seriously erred by denying her request for an adjournment, which meant she was not reasonably able to participate in the proceeding.

Unlock Order Content

Actions and Evidence

The Tenant requested a review of an order denying her motion to set aside an eviction. At the set-aside hearing, she requested an adjournment because she 'had been awake for 48 hours due to a severe bedbug infestation.' She had previously made other requests to delay the hearing. The Board found her claim about the bedbugs 'extraordinary' and unsubstantiated.

Unlock Order Content

Procedural Errors

The Tenant filed an incomplete request to reschedule one day before a hearing and failed to provide evidence to substantiate a different adjournment request made during the hearing.

Unlock Order Content

Considerations

The Tenant made multiple requests to adjourn or reschedule for varying reasons, and the final reason (a sudden, severe bedbug infestation) was deemed not credible by the Board.

Unlock Order Content

Need assistance from an expert?

Similar Cases

Click to switch between order outcomes

ZAHRA PROPERTIES v UFOEGBUNE

Contested Dispute
Landlord Wins
July 24, 2025
Toronto
Review Order

Toronto tenant's eviction for over $23,000 in rent arrears upheld after their counterclaims of harassment and assault were dismissed on procedural grounds.

Tenant Sent Invalid Notice
Testimony Contested
Section 82 Issues Raised and Denied
ContentionExtreme

PAK PETROLEUM INC v DEGUIRE

Contested Dispute
Landlord Wins
July 21, 2025
VANKLEEK HILL

Tenant facing eviction for over $4,700 in unpaid rent despite claims of no hot water and being bitten twice by rats.

Testimony Contested
Eviction Relief Granted
Section 82 Issues Raised and Denied
ContentionExtreme

Thomas v Thomas

Contested Dispute
Landlord Wins
July 21, 2025
Ottawa

LTB rules the Residential Tenancies Act does not apply to siblings sharing a home, as the shared kitchen exemption holds despite a standard lease and the landlord's temporary absences.

Testimony Contested
RTA Not Applicable
ContentionModerate

Pennytech Inc v Superior Building Group Limited

Contested Dispute
Landlord Wins
July 21, 2025
Port Carling
Review Order

LTB upholds ruling against a corporate tenant and admonishes their lawyer for submitting fake, AI-generated legal citations.

Tenant Aggravating Factor
Testimony Contested
RTA Not Applicable
ContentionExtreme

ZAHRA PROPERTIES v UFOEGBUNE

Contested Dispute
Landlord Wins
July 24, 2025
Toronto
Review Order

Toronto tenant's eviction for over $23,000 in rent arrears upheld after their counterclaims of harassment and assault were dismissed on procedural grounds.

Tenant Sent Invalid Notice
Testimony Contested
Section 82 Issues Raised and Denied
ContentionExtreme

PAK PETROLEUM INC v DEGUIRE

Contested Dispute
Landlord Wins
July 21, 2025
VANKLEEK HILL

Tenant facing eviction for over $4,700 in unpaid rent despite claims of no hot water and being bitten twice by rats.

Testimony Contested
Eviction Relief Granted
Section 82 Issues Raised and Denied
ContentionExtreme

Thomas v Thomas

Contested Dispute
Landlord Wins
July 21, 2025
Ottawa

LTB rules the Residential Tenancies Act does not apply to siblings sharing a home, as the shared kitchen exemption holds despite a standard lease and the landlord's temporary absences.

Testimony Contested
RTA Not Applicable
ContentionModerate

Pennytech Inc v Superior Building Group Limited

Contested Dispute
Landlord Wins
July 21, 2025
Port Carling
Review Order

LTB upholds ruling against a corporate tenant and admonishes their lawyer for submitting fake, AI-generated legal citations.

Tenant Aggravating Factor
Testimony Contested
RTA Not Applicable
ContentionExtreme

Unlock More Similar Orders

Access our complete database of similar cases to make more informed decisions and better understand LTB rulings.

Compare outcomes of similar cases to assess your position

Analyze patterns in LTB decisions for your case type

Build stronger arguments with real case references

Share:

Latest Insights from Our Blog

Stay informed with expert analysis on rental law, tenant rights, and LTB decisions

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 Professionals

Post Your Legal Needs

Describe your legal situation and receive competitive quotes from qualified professionals in our marketplace.

Post a Bounty

Join thousands of Ontarians who have found legal help through our platform