Corrine Thaw v. John Furrow and Carmen Noseworthy, 2010 ONSC 1270

Overview

This is an appeal by the landlord pursuant to s.210 of the Residential Tenancies Act. This Divisional Court has jurisdiction only to consider a question of law.

2There were four grounds of appeal enumerated in the Notice of Appeal. However, counsel on behalf of the appellant has argued only one ground of appeal; that the appellant was denied procedural fairness, that she may not have understood the role she was entitled to play at the hearing before the Board, and therefore failed to fully participate. However, upon a full examination of the transcript, we are satisfied that Vice Chair Savoie, who presided at the hearing accorded her a full opportunity to present her evidence and to examine opposing witnesses. Indeed there is no evidence to the contrary. As well she was assisted at the hearing by Ms. Claudia Vecchio. In sum, there is no evidence of a denial of procedural fairness to the appellant. That could only be seen as to her advantage.

3I would add that Vice Chair Savoie, in careful and cogent reasons, made specific findings of fact and issued a balanced ruling based on the evidence. His findings of fact are not reviewable by this Court.

4For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.

COSTS

[5]

Costs

The applicant/appellant Corrine Thaw shall pay costs to the respondents, John Furrow and Carmen Noseworthy fixed at $5,000.00 inclusive of disbursements and GST, costs payable forthwith.