COURT FILE NO.: 173/07
DATE: 20080108
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
cumming, swinton and smith jj.
B E T W E E N:
CORY SHIEFF
Tenant
(Appellant)
- and -
ARLENE COOPER
Landlord
(Respondent in Appeal)
Alan S. Price, for the Tenant
David S. Strashin, for the Landlord
HEARD at Toronto: January 8, 2008
CUMMING J.: (Orally)
[1] The tenant has brought a motion to adduce fresh evidence available only after the Landlord and Tenant Board rendered its decision regarding “good faith”. In our view, this evidence, even if admissible, does not call into question the Member’s findings of good faith on the part of the landlord.
[2] Pursuant to s.196(1) of the Tenant Protection Act, an appeal is only allowable to this Court on a question of law.
[3] In our view, and we so find, there is not any error of law in any of Member Maher’s findings and the disposition of the proceeding before the Member.
[4] The Notice of Termination is not defective because there was no confusion as to what it meant. The Member properly found that the notice was substantially compliant and therefore sufficient. Whether or not a second tenant, who vacated the premises in February 2007, was served with a copy of the Notice of Termination, is irrelevant to the matter before the Tribunal.
[5] The Member found that the affidavit filed by the landlord met the statutory requirements and that any alteration was not significant.
[6] The Member heard extensive evidence on the issue of good faith and made a determination consistent with the Tenant Protection Act. A landlord need not establish that the requirement of possession was reasonable. The Member did not impose an onus upon the tenant to establish bad faith. Rather, the Member found that the landlord was acting in good faith (paragraph 1 of her Decision, in particular) and found that the tenant had not adduced any probative evidence to the contrary (paragraph 8 of her Decision). The Member accepted the landlord’s evidence as credible.
[7] For the reasons given, the appeal is dismissed.
[8] On the issue of costs, it is the unanimous view of the panel that costs should be awarded to the landlord on a partial indemnity basis in the amount of $3,500.00, inclusive of GST, all disbursements and an earlier award of $350.00 costs payable to the landlord in respect of an interim matter. The panel further orders that there be a vacating of the Certificate of Stay provided, however, the eviction order in place is not to be enforced prior to January 31, 2008.
CUMMING J.
SWINTON J.
SMITH J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: January 8, 2008
Date of Release: January 14, 2008
COURT FILE NO.: 173/07
DATE: 20080108
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
cumming, swinton and smith jj.
B E T W E E N:
CORY SHIEFF
Tenant
(Appellant)
- and -
ARLENE COOPER
Landlord
(Respondent in Appeal)
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
CUMMING J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: January 8, 2008
Date of Release: January 14, 2008