The landlord appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board decision granting the tenants a 2.5 per cent rent reduction due to the loss of green space resulting from infill construction.
The Board had found the lands constituted a 'common recreational facility' under the Tenant Protection Act, 1997.
The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, holding that ordinary green space does not meet the statutory definition of a facility, which requires something built or installed to perform a particular function.
The Court also found the Board erred in law by calculating the rent reduction using a novel mathematical approach rather than the mandatory method prescribed by regulation.
