The tenant appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board decision dismissing his applications for substantial interference and failure to meet maintenance obligations.
The tenant and his family had moved into the rental unit but left the next day because it was unsafe and unfit for habitation due to ongoing repairs.
The Divisional Court found the Board erred in law by focusing on the tenant's prior knowledge of the unit's condition, ignoring evidence of the severity of the deficiencies, and failing to provide a remedy despite finding the unit unfit for habitation.
The appeal was allowed, and the tenant was awarded the return of his deposit, rent abatement, and out-of-pocket expenses.
