Clancy Catelin

The appellant, Lydian Smith, appealed a Divisional Court decision affirming the Landlord and Tenant Board's finding that YouthLink Youth Services' transitional housing program was exempt from the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 under s. 5(k).

The Court of Appeal affirmed that s. 5(k) and the newer s. 5.1 can co-exist, and that "rehabilitative or therapeutic services" in s. 5(k) include broader support services beyond medical care.

The court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Board and Divisional Court correctly interpreted the statutory exemptions and that the YouthLink program fell within the s. 5(k) exemption.

The appellant appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board decision finding that the respondent's transitional youth housing program was exempt from the Residential Tenancies Act under section 5(k).

The appellant argued that the introduction of section 5.1, which specifically regulates transitional housing, meant the respondent could no longer rely on section 5(k) without meeting section 5.1's prescriptive requirements.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, holding that section 5.1(5) explicitly preserves other exemptions, and the Board made no error of law in finding the respondent's program met the requirements for the section 5(k) exemption.