CITATION: James Tallon v. Edgewood Villa Inc., 2022 ONSC 6048
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 787/21 LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD FILE NO.: TST-16742-20 & TST-11774-19
DATE: 20221025
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT
Backhouse, Stewart and Leiper JJ.
BETWEEN:
James Tallon Appellant/Tenant
– and –
Edgewood Villa Inc. Respondent/Landlord
James Tallon, Self-Represented, for the Appellant/Tenant Nicole A. Kiselyov, for the Respondent/Landlord
HEARD at Toronto: October 25, 2022
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
LEIPER J. (Orally)
[1] The Appellant/Tenant, Mr. Tallon, is a resident of the Respondent/Landlord, Edgewood Villa, a Care Home, in the City of Toronto.
[2] Mr. Tallon appealed orders made by the Landlord and Tenant Board (the “Tribunal”), after a hearing. The appeal was initially scheduled to proceed on July 14, 2022. That hearing was adjourned to today’s date for the transcripts to be obtained, and for the parties to exchange materials. Both steps were successfully taken.
[3] However, following review of the transcripts, Mr. Tallon filed a motion with the Tribunal on August 28, 2022, seeking to have it consider a motion for an order finding the witness for the Landlord in contempt, pursuant to s. 13(1) of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.22, (SPPA). A date for the contempt motion has not yet been scheduled.
[4] Mr. Tallon seeks to adjourn this appeal for a second time pending a hearing of his motion.
[5] Counsel for the Respondent/Landlord, Ms. Kiselyov, opposes Mr. Tallon’s motion for adjournment on three bases; that it is not in the interest of justice to adjourn this hearing a second time, because it has already been adjourned on one occasion, that a finding of contempt has no relevance to the appeal, and that Mr. Tallon cannot succeed in establishing contempt under the SPPA, s. 13(1).
[6] Dealing with the latter point first: the motion for contempt under s. 13(1) (SPPA) is an unusual, and rare step. Mr. Tallon has acknowledged this. His materials include the findings of the Tribunal, in which the evidence of the Landlord’s witness was explicitly preferred to Mr. Tallon’s evidence on the question of common or individual mailboxes in the former care home at which he resided that was managed by the same landlord. This was a live issue before the Tribunal, and Mr. Tallon has material that appears to bear on the question of that evidence in his favour.
[7] S. 13(1) provides a mechanism to bring a motion for contempt. We express no view on the merits of the contempt motion before the Tribunal.
[8] The issue underlying the motion for contempt relates to the decision which is the subject of this appeal. The outcome may, or may not, become relevant to Mr. Tallon’s potential relief on appeal.
[9] Finally, we have considered the interest of justice. Weighing in favour of proceeding today are the fact that this is a second appearance, the parties have perfected their materials, and resources have been expended to bring this case forward. Weighing in favour of the adjournment is the importance of justice being seen to be done, the interests of a self-represented individual who it appears has not engaged in a pattern of delay, but instead has required the time to inform himself to obtain funding, order transcripts, and prepare the necessary materials. He has demonstrated a live question concerning a piece of evidence, before the Tribunal, which may have affected credibility.
[10] On balance, therefore, we have decided to allow the application for the adjournment.
[11] Once a date is obtained for the hearing of the contempt motion before the Tribunal, the parties are to inform the Registrar of the Divisional Court, and a conference is to be scheduled before Matheson J. or her designate to address a further timetable for the hearing of this appeal.
[12] Costs are reserved to the panel hearing this appeal.
Leiper J.
I agree _______________________________
Backhouse J.
I agree _______________________________
Stewart J.
Date of Oral Reasons for Judgment: October 25, 2022
Date of Written Release: November 14, 2022
CITATION: James Tallon v. Edgewood Villa Inc., 2022 ONSC 6048
DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 787/21 LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD FILE NO.: TST-16742-20 & TST-11774-19
DATE: 20221025
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT
Backhouse, Stewart and Leiper JJ.
BETWEEN:
James Tallon Appellant/Tenant
– and –
Edgewood Villa Inc. Respondent/Landlord
ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
LEIPER J.
Date of Oral Reasons for Judgment: October 25, 2022
Date of Release: November 14, 2022