K. Douglas

The appellant tenant appealed an eviction order from the Landlord and Tenant Board.

After multiple extensions and failures to perfect the appeal, the appellant requested an adjournment on the eve of the hearing, citing a recently filed human rights complaint and an inability to retain counsel.

The Divisional Court denied the adjournment, finding no reasonable prospect of the appellant retaining counsel and noting that human rights issues were not raised before the Board.

The appeal was dismissed for delay and failure to comply with court directions, though the eviction was stayed for 90 days to allow the appellant to find new housing.

The respondent landlord brought a motion to dismiss the tenant's appeal of a Landlord and Tenant Board order for delay.

The tenant had filed the appeal over two and a half years prior but failed to order the required transcripts or take steps to perfect the appeal after a related judicial review was dismissed.

The tenant did not attend the motion or file responding materials.

The court granted the motion and dismissed the appeal for delay, finding no reasonable explanation for the failure to pursue the appeal.

The tenant appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board order evicting her from her subsidized housing unit for allegedly throwing a rabbit off her balcony.

The Board's finding was based entirely on double hearsay evidence—a police officer reading another officer's notes of a statement made by the tenant's ex-boyfriend.

The tenant and a witness testified the rabbit jumped, but the Board preferred the hearsay evidence.

The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, holding that relying on untested, highly prejudicial hearsay evidence without giving the tenant an opportunity to cross-examine the key witness constituted a denial of procedural fairness.