560779 Ontario Inc. v. Steven Carey, 2014 ONSC 1228

CITATION: 560779 Ontario Inc. v. Steven Carey, 2014 ONSC 1228

DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: DC 12420

DATE: 2014/02/26

Steven Carey

N.J. Tourgis , for the Plaintiff/Appellant

Plaintiff/Appellant

and -

560779 Ontario Inc. Operating as Carey Industries

Defendant/Respondent

Michael Valente, for the Defendant/Respondent

HEARD: February 24, 2014

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1Following a hearing, the Member of the Board made findings of fact including:

there was a landlord;
there was a tenant;
a tenancy was provided as part of a compensation package for employment;

-the tenancy ended when the employment relationship ended.

2The applicant requested a review which was held and dismissed.

3The applicant continues to occupy the premises.

4No rent has been paid since the end of the tenancy.

5Rent continues to accrue.

6The Member’s findings of fact are fundamental and go to the heart of the Board’s jurisdiction and expertise.

7The Member’s factual findings were required in order to appropriately adjudicate the dispute before him.

8The standard of review is reasonableness.

9There has been no error of law and an appeal to this court is only permitted on a question of law.

10The findings of fact made by the Board are within the realm of reasonable expectations and the jurisdiction of the Board.

11To be clear, the member has not otherwise determined the terms of the lease. The validity of the lease is presumed.

12Conclusions made by the Member in the course of the proceedings concerning any title to property or indeed, whether there is in fact a lease, are not binding on any Judge of this court who may who may be obliged to deal with this matter subsequently ( see Kaiman v. Graham 2009 ONCA 77).

13At the outset of this hearing, we were asked in the alterative, to stay the eviction order pending the outcome of the outstanding litigation in our court between these parties. We decline to do so. An application for a stay may be brought upon proper materials being filed which address the test for injunction relief.

14The appeal is dismissed.

15Costs submissions if any are to be made in writing, and less than two pages within two weeks.

Marrocco J.

Whitaker J.

Ellies J.

Released: February 26, 2014

CITATION: 560779 Ontario Inc. v. Steven Carey, 2014 ONSC 1228

DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: DC 12420

DATE: 2014/02/26

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

DIVISIONAL COURT

MARROCCO, WHITAKER, ELLIES J.J.

B E T W E E N: