Ryan Hardy

The landlord brought a motion to quash the tenant's appeal of a Landlord and Tenant Board eviction order.

The eviction was ordered after the landlord sold the residential unit and the purchasers required it for personal use.

The tenant's appeal automatically stayed the eviction.

The Divisional Court found that the tenant's grounds of appeal challenged findings of fact and did not raise any extricable questions of law as required by section 201 of the Residential Tenancies Act.

The court quashed the appeal, lifted the stay, and ordered the immediate enforcement of the eviction.

The appellant tenant appealed an eviction order granted by the Landlord and Tenant Board.

The landlord had issued an N5 notice for substantial interference with reasonable enjoyment.

The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, finding that the Board committed an error of law by failing to make a mandatory finding under s. 64(3) of the Residential Tenancies Act regarding whether the tenant had ceased the offending conduct within the seven-day voiding period.

The review decision's reliance on unrecorded oral evidence to cure this defect was also found to be unreasonable.