Reilly v. Quinn, 2019 ONSC 6802
CITATION: Reilly v. Quinn, 2019 ONSC 6802
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 442/19
LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD FILE NO.: TSL-05333-19
DATE: 20191122
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
BETWEEN:
PATRICK REILLY
Tenant (Appellant)
– and –
STEPHEN QUINN
Landlord (Respondent)
Stephen Reilly acting in person
Timothy M. Duggan, for the Landlord (Respondent)
HEARD at Toronto: November 22, 2019
Oral Reasons for Judgment
Backhouse J. (Orally)
[1] The landlord and his counsel attended this morning. The tenant attended and sought an adjournment on the basis that he did not consent to this date.
[2] Counsel for the landlord has provided me with two letters dated October 3, 2019 and October 16, 2019 which have been marked as Exhibits "A" and "B" on this motion.
[3] I am satisfied based on these letters that Mr. Reilly, the tenant, had notice pursuant to the Rules and that there is no basis for his adjournment request. He then chose to absent himself advising that he intended to appeal.
[4] The landlord seeks an order quashing the tenant’s appeal or an order dismissing the appeal for delay and to lift the automatic stay of eviction.
[5] The Landlord and Tenant Board made an order terminating the tenant’s tenancy at 2 Humberview Road, Toronto, effective July 23, 2019 and requiring the tenant to pay the landlord compensation of $46.03 per day for use of the rental unit from July 13, 2019 to the date he vacated the rental unit.
[6] This order was based on persistent late payment of rent. The tenant did not attend the hearing before the Board.
[7] The tenant’s request for a review of the order was dismissed on July 18, 2019. The landlord commenced a separate application to terminate the tenancy for non-payment of rent. The tenant did not attend the hearing before the Board. The Board made a Rental Arrears Eviction Order on June 6, 2019 requiring the tenant to vacate the unit by June 17, 2019 which the tenant could void by paying $8,590 on or before June 17, 2019.
[8] The tenant requested a review of the Rent Arrears Eviction Order which was dismissed as abandoned when the tenant did not attend until more than 3 hours after the scheduled start time by which time the Board had dismissed the tenant’s request and the landlord and his counsel had left.
[9] The tenant did not vacate the unit. On August 8, 2019, he commenced an appeal of the late payment review order. He has not appealed any of the other aforementioned orders of the Board.
[10] The grounds for appeal are that the Board failed to notify him of the late payment review order until approximately one week after the same was made and that the late payment review order was a wrong decision concerning a question of law. There was no elaboration of why it was a wrong decision or what law the tenant was relying upon.
[11] The tenant has not complied with Subrules 61.05(5) or 61.09(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure.
[12] The tenant’s appeal is devoid of merit. It fails to raise any legitimate point of law. He has not paid any amount since the date of the Rent Arrears Eviction Order and continues to reside in the rental unit. As at today’s date, he owes the landlord $13,760.34. There are accordingly grounds to dismiss the appeal for delay. In addition, the appeal is an abuse of the court’s process by a litigant including the filing of an appeal as a stratagem to game the system and delay eviction and should not be condoned.
[13] Accordingly, I order the appeal to be quashed.
ORDER TO GO AS FOLLOWS:
(1) quashing the tenant’s appeal;
(2) lifting the stay of eviction; and
(3) directing the Sheriff to enforce the late payment eviction order and provide the landlord with vacant possession of the rental unit on an immediate and expedited basis.
[14] Given these findings, substantial indemnity costs against the tenant are appropriate which I fix in the amount of $5,607.32 inclusive.
Backhouse J.
Date of Oral Reasons for Judgment: November 22, 2019
Date of Release: December 12, 2019
CITATION: Reilly v. Quin, 2019 ONSC 6802
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 442/19
LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD FILE NO.: TSL-05333-19
DATE: 20191122
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
BETWEEN:
PATRICK REILLY
Tenant (Appellant)
– and –
STEPHEN QUINN
Landlord (Respondent)
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Backhouse J.
Date of Oral Reasons for Judgment: November 22, 2019
Date of Release: December 12, 2019