2 total
The court upheld the termination of a housing subsidy due to unreported household changes.
Charlas MacKenzie, eligible for rent-geared-to-income assistance, had his subsidy terminated by Ottawa Community Housing Corporation and the City of Ottawa.
This was due to his failure to report a change in household composition (daughters removed due to bail conditions) and prolonged absence from his unit (required to live with surety).
The Divisional Court dismissed his application for judicial review, finding the respondents' decisions reasonable.
The Court of Appeal upheld the Divisional Court's decision, finding the respondents' interpretation and application of the Housing Services Act, 2011 and its regulations regarding reporting changes and absence from the unit to be reasonable, particularly in the context of limited housing subsidies and long waitlists.
The court also found no error in the assessment of extenuating circumstances.
Judicial review dismissed; revocation of rent-geared-to-income subsidy for unreported absence and household changes was reasonable.
The applicant sought judicial review of a decision revoking his rent-geared-to-income (RGI) assistance.
The housing provider terminated the subsidy after discovering the applicant was subject to bail conditions requiring him to reside with a surety and prohibiting contact with his children, meaning he had been absent from the unit for over 60 days and failed to report a change in household composition.
The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding the administrative decision was reasonable, properly interpreted the legislative scheme, and adequately considered the applicant's circumstances.
