Court File and Parties

CITATION: Graff v. Capreit Limited Partnership, 2016 ONSC 6173

DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 477/15

DATE: 20161003

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO

DIVISIONAL COURT

RE: MARIE GRAFF v. CAPREIT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

BEFORE: NORDHEIMER J.

HEARD at Toronto: written submissions

E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] Notice was given by the Registrar to Ms. Graff, pursuant to r. 2.1.01(3) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, that the court was considering making an order dismissing an appeal brought by Ms. Graff on the basis that the proceeding appears to be frivolous, vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the court. Ms. Graff was given fifteen days, from receipt of the notice, to file written submissions on these matters, not to exceed ten pages in total. On September 27, 2016, Ms. Graff filed a short letter in response.

[2] This appeal arises out of what appears to be an ongoing dispute that Ms. Graff has with her landlord. One or more of those other disputes are, apparently, subject to other proceedings in this court. In her written response, Ms. Graff acknowledges that this particular aspect of those disputes is moot since she has paid the arrears of rent that led to the order of the Landlord and Tenant Board and thus avoided eviction. Nonetheless, Ms. Graff asserts that she should be entitled to the costs of her appeal.

[3] Ms. Graff is entitled to make submissions that she should be able to recover her costs of the appeal notwithstanding that the issues raised in the appeal are now moot. Without expressing any views on the merits of Ms. Graff’s position, I cannot conclude that her desire to make submissions on costs is a matter that is frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of the court’s process.

[4] Consequently, the appeal should be listed for hearing on a date convenient to the parties. To make it clear, the only issue to be addressed before this court on this matter is the proper disposition of the costs of the appeal. No other issues may be raised before the court in respect to this file. Given the very narrow issue for this court to determine, the appeal can be listed for

hearing without the need for the respondent to file any responding material, including a factum.

NORDHEIMER J.

DATE: October 3, 2016