The appellant landlord appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board decision finding that the respondent tenant's lease was residential, not commercial.
The landlord had locked the tenant out for non-payment of rent, claiming the Commercial Tenancies Act applied.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the landlord could not oust the Board's jurisdiction by unilaterally locking the tenant out.
The court further found no error of law in the Board's application of section 202 of the Residential Tenancies Act to ascertain the real substance of the transaction, despite the lease being labeled commercial.
