Joel Yinger

The tenants appealed an eviction order from the Landlord and Tenant Board, arguing that the Board breached procedural fairness by refusing to allow Tenant Duty Counsel to make submissions and by failing to record the entire hearing.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the tenants had a reasonable opportunity to participate and that Duty Counsel, acting as a support person, had no standing to make submissions after the parties had closed their cases.

The Court also held that the lack of a complete hearing recording did not breach procedural fairness, as the Board's reasons were sufficient for appellate review and no error of law was identified in the Board's refusal to set aside the eviction order.

The appellants, ten tenants of a mobile home park, appealed three Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) decisions allowing the landlord's application to evict them to convert the property to non-residential use.

The tenants argued the LTB erred in law regarding the sufficiency of the N13 notices, the test for good faith, and the consideration of relief from eviction under s. 83 of the Residential Tenancies Act.

The Divisional Court found no errors of law, holding that the notices provided sufficient detail, the LTB correctly assessed the landlord's good faith intention to convert the land use, and the LTB adequately considered the tenants' circumstances before granting the eviction with a delayed enforcement.

The appeal was dismissed.