Kyle Warwick

The appellant tenant, who suffers from a mental health disability, appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board order terminating her tenancy and evicting her due to disruptive and threatening behaviour towards other tenants.

The tenant argued the Board failed to properly consider the landlord's duty to accommodate her disability under the Human Rights Code, failed to consider relief from eviction under s. 83 of the Residential Tenancies Act, and denied her procedural fairness by relying on hearsay evidence.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding the Board correctly determined that accommodating the tenant caused undue hardship to the landlord and other tenants, properly exercised its discretion regarding relief from eviction, and appropriately admitted and weighed hearsay evidence.

The landlord brought a motion to quash the tenant's appeal of a Landlord and Tenant Board eviction order, arguing the appeal was devoid of merit and an abuse of process.

The tenant, who suffers from a mental disorder, appealed on grounds including the LTB's failure to apply the correct Human Rights Code accommodation test, failure to meaningfully consider relief from eviction under s. 83 of the Residential Tenancies Act, and denial of procedural fairness.

The Divisional Court dismissed the motion to quash, finding the grounds of appeal raised arguable questions of law and the appeal was not an abuse of process.

The court also declined to lift the statutory stay of eviction or order security for costs.

The appellant tenant appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board order terminating her tenancy and evicting her family following an altercation with the building superintendent over a clogged sink.

The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, finding the Board made several errors of law.

Specifically, the Board failed to consider whether the tenant 'permitted' the illegal act (spitting) under s. 61(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act, improperly speculated about future risk under s. 66(1), and failed to consider all relevant circumstances for relief from eviction under s. 83.

The eviction order was set aside and the landlord's applications were dismissed.