Court File and Parties
CITATION: Matechuk v. Raamco Int’l Properties, 2015 ONSC 1194
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 538/12
TSL-21278-11 and TSL-21278-11-RV
DATE: 20150223
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT
SWINTON, SACHS AND CORBETT JJ.
BETWEEN:
DAYLE MATECHUK Appellant (Tenant)
– and –
RAAMCO INTERNATIONAL PROPERTIES Respondent (Landlord)
In Person Jane L. Ferguson, for the Respondent (Landlord) Brian A. Blumenthal, for the Landlord and Tenant Board
HEARD at Toronto: February 23, 2015
Oral Reasons for Judgment
SWINTON J. (ORALLY)
[1] While we are sympathetic to the fact that this situation has caused the appellant considerable stress, we note that the Notice of Appeal in this matter was filed more than two years ago. The time for perfection has already been extended once.
[2] It would be contrary to the fair and orderly administration of justice to allow the appellant an adjournment so that she can recast the Notice of Appeal and bring a motion for fresh evidence.
[3] Accordingly, the request for an adjournment is denied.
SWINTON J.
SACHS J.
D. L. CORBETT J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: February 23, 2015
Date of Release: February 25, 2015
CITATION: Matechuk v. Raamco Int’l Properties, 2015 ONSC 1194
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 538/12
TSL-21278-11 and TSL-21278-11-RV
DATE: 20150223
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT
SWINTON, SACHS AND CORBETT JJ.
BETWEEN:
DAYLE MATECHUK Appellant (Tenant)
– and –
RAAMCO INTERNATIONAL PROPERTIES Respondent (Landlord)
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
SWINTON J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: February 23, 2015
Date of Release: February 25, 2015