Li v. Mackenzie, 2025 ONSC 7027
CITATION: Li v. Mackenzie, 2025 ONSC 7027
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: DC-25-00000184-0000
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO
DIVISIONAL COURT
RE: Qidao Li, Appellant (self-represented)
AND:
Hansmattie Mackenzie & Dean Allan Mackenzie, Respondents (self-represented)
BEFORE: ACJ McWatt
HEARD: December 15, 2025, in writing
ENDORSEMENT
ACJ F. MCWATT
1The Appellant, Qidao Li, filed an appeal to the Divisional Court from the judgment of the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) dated February 4, 2025.
2The Appellant asks that the judgment be set aside, and that the LTB be directed to reconsider the case through a proper review process, ensuring compliance with procedural fairness and legal standards.
3The Grounds of Appeal are as follows:
LTB violated procedural fairness by rejecting the Appellant’s review request on contradictory grounds.
LTB failed to consider new evidence submitted by the Appellant, contradicting its own rules.
LTB misapplied section 33 of the Residential Tenancies Act (RTA §33) by wrongly shifting the burden of proof to the Appellant.
LTB relied on misleading evidence and failed to conduct a proper review of the facts.
LTB’s decision was unreasonable, as it did not provide sufficient reasons and lacked a proper legal basis.
4The Respondents have brought a motion to dismiss the appeal as the Appellant has filed no materials.
5The Appellant attended the LTB hearing on October 28, 2024. At that hearing, he provided no evidence. A decision was issued by the Board on January 13, 2025, under (File No. LTB-L-084122-23) for the appellant to pay Compensation for Damages to the rental property.
6The Appellant subsequently filed a Request for Review, which was dismissed.
7On February 25, 2025, after many requests by the Respondents to the Appellant for payment, with no response, a Notice of Garnishment was issued to the Appellant.
8On March 4, 2025, the Notice of appeal was filed by the Mr. Li.
9On April 8, 2025, a stay was issued pending appeal.
10The Respondents were never served with the required documents for the appeal. Their names were included in the "Certificate of Stay," but they did not receive the supporting materials required for it. They have never received any supporting documents, but the appeal materials appear to have been directed to the LTB.
11Counsel for the LTB sent an email to the parties, in which she noted that Respondents were not named or served on the appeal. Despite this, the Appellant has done nothing to correct the record to include them.
12The Appellant has not taken the necessary steps to advance or perfect this appeal. To date, the required materials have not been filed or served in accordance with the rules.
13The Motion to dismiss the appeal is granted.
14The Appellant shall pay costs of this motion to the Respondents in the amount of $760.50 for disbursements.
ACJ F. MCWATT
Released: December 15, 2025