CITATION: Vangjeli v. WJ Properties, 2019 ONSC 4994
COURT FILE NO.: DC 373/19 DATE: 20190827
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
B E T W E E N:
ROMEO VANGJELI and SOTIRAQ VANGJELI Applicants
- and -
WJ PROPERTIES Respondent
Counsel: Self-represented
Read at Toronto: August 23, 2019
ENDORSEMENT
D.L. Corbett J.:
[1] The applicant purports to apply for judicial review overturning decisions from the Landlord and Tenant Board in case file TSL-27998-12, stopping enforcement of the order of the Landlord and Tenant Board in Small Claims Court file SC-14-1313, "bring[ing] possible Fraudulent charges Against WJ Properties for Attempting to Commit Fraud and Committing Perjury and Falsifying Court Documents", and a "Restitution Order for the True Amount of Damages done by WJ Properties to [the applicants] and [their] Family."
[2] It is clear on the face of the notice of application that the proceeding is not constituted properly. The applicants are self-represented litigants and are entitled to assistance in putting their case before the court properly. However, there are two preliminary matters that must be addressed before all else.
[3] The impugned decisions of the Landlord and Tenant Board were made on June 11, 2012 and February 20, 2013. While it is true that the applicants were not present before the Landlord and Tenant Board in June 2012, they were present in February 2013, and did receive notice of the Board's adverse decision in 2013.
[4] The applicants were entitled to appeal from the decision of the Landlord Tenant Board pursuant to s.120 of the Residential Tenancies Act. That appeal was to be brought within 30 days of the impugned decision. This deadline expired in 2013. The applicants commenced this application on July 4, 2019, more than six years after the appeal deadline.
[5] This court will not ordinarily entertain an application for judicial review unless an applicant has exhausted his appeal rights, and then only upon specific and narrow bases.
[6] Notice was sent to the applicants pursuant to Rule 2.1.01 giving them notice that the court is considering making an order staying or dismissing this proceeding because it appears on its face to be frivolous or vexatious or otherwise an abuse of the process of the court. The applicant responded to this notice, but failed to address the court's primary concerns that (a) judicial review is not available to the applicants because they have failed to exhaust their appeal rights under s.210 of the Residential Tenancy Act; and (b) it is much too late for the applicants to appeal now, more than six years after the appeal deadline.
[7] I do not consider that the notice sent to the applicants sufficiently identified the nature of the court's concerns about their application, as described above. In the circumstances, I will give the applicants a further opportunity to address these concerns. They may do so, in writing, within 15 days of this decision, in a written submission of no more than ten pages in length. I will then consider whether to stay or dismiss this case pursuant to R.2.1.01.
D.L. Corbett J.
Date of Reasons: August 27, 2019
COURT FILE NO.: DC 373/19 DATE: 20190827
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
D.L. Corbett J.
BETWEEN:
Romeo Vangjeli and Sotiraq Vangjeli Applicants
– and –
WJ Properties Respondent
ENDORSEMENT
D.L. Corbett J.
Date of Release: August 27, 2019