COURT FILE NO.: 70/03
DATE: 20040519
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
o’driscoll, meehan AND swinton jj.
B E T W E E N:
RICHMOND STREET INVESTMENTS
Applicant (Respondent in Appeal)
- and -
JOHN P. EARLE
Respondent (Appellant in Appeal)
Joseph Kary, for the Appellant (Tenant)
Catherine Buie, for the Respondent (Landlord)
HEARD: May 19, 2004
O’DRISCOLL J.: (Orally)
[1] The Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal’s orders of October 16, 2002 and January 30, 2003 are before us on an appeal under s.196 of the Tenant Protection Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, c.24. These are the only orders before us. Each order concerns 32 Britain Street, Toronto.
[2] The record also shows us another order of the Tribunal in reference to 30 Britain Street. It is dated October 6, 2003, is found at p. 42 of the Appeal Book, and states, in part:
“7. Richmond Street Investments sold 32A Britain Street and agreed with the Tenant to move to 30 Britain Street in an agreement dated March 15, 2003.
- The agreement signed by Ms. Ferrier on behalf of Richmond Street Investments Inc. stated in 2.3 “The parties agree that this agreement shall not affect the rights of the parties with respect to any tenancy, occupation, action or proceeding relating to 32A Britain Street and that all such rights shall continue and be otherwise applicable to 30 Britain Street in the same manner as if 30 Britain Street was the premises always occupied by Earle (the Tenant).”
[3] We have been advised by counsel that the premises known as 32 Britain Street have been sold to another party and Mr. Earle does not inhabit 32 Britain Street. The bottom line of all of this is that, in our view, this appeal is moot.
[4] We are not to be taken as having placed our stamp of approval on any of the orders or proceedings before the Tribunal concerning either 30 Britain Street and/or 32 Britain Street.
[5] I have consulted my colleagues and I have endorsed the Appeal Book and Compendium as follows: “This appeal is moot for the oral reasons given this date. In all the circumstances, no order as to costs.”
O’DRISCOLL J.
MEEHAN J.
SWINTON J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: May 19, 2004
Date of Release: June 16, 2004
COURT FILE NO.: 70/03
DATE: 20040519
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
o’driscoll, meehan AND swinton jj.
B E T W E E N:
RICHMOND STREET INVESTMENTS
Applicant (Respondent in Appeal)
- and -
JOHN P. EARLE
Respondent (Appellant in Appeal)
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
O’DRISCOLL J.
Date of Reasons for Judgment: May 19, 2004
Date of Release: June 16, 2004