4 total
Motion for leave to appeal Landlord and Tenant Board orders dismissed, lifting the stay.
The moving party brought a motion for leave to appeal orders of the Landlord and Tenant Board.
The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal without costs, which had the effect of lifting the stay of the Board's orders.
Motion dismissed after applying the governing appellate and procedural standards.
The applicant sought relief in a motion before the Court of Appeal for Ontario.
The court reviewed the record and applied the governing legal and procedural standards, including deference to factual and discretionary determinations where required.
The matter concluded with the following disposition: Motion dismissed.
Tenants' appeal dismissed; Board afforded procedural fairness and correctly applied law regarding bed bug response.
The tenants appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board decision dismissing their application for substantial interference related to bed bugs in their rental unit.
The tenants argued the Board breached procedural fairness and made an unreasonable decision.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Board afforded sufficient procedural fairness and properly controlled its own process.
Furthermore, the Court held that appeals from the Board are restricted to questions of law, making reasonableness review inapplicable, and found no error in the Board's application of the law regarding the landlord's maintenance obligations.
Tenant's appeal of LTB eviction order dismissed as grounds raised unappealable questions of mixed fact and law.
The tenant appealed an Eviction Order and a Review Order from the Landlord and Tenant Board, which upheld her eviction for non-payment of rent and dismissed her claim for a rent abatement due to an HVAC noise issue.
The tenant argued the Board erred in its factual findings regarding when the noise was resolved and whether the landlord acted reasonably.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the tenant's grounds of appeal raised questions of mixed fact and law, which are not appealable under section 210 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006.
The court also upheld the Review Member's refusal to admit new evidence.