Simon's Legal Resources

RTA - Appeals - Fresh Law

. Shearer v. Oz

In Shearer v. Oz (Div Ct, 2026) the Divisional Court dismissed a joint RTA appeal-JR, these brought against "two decisions of the Landlord and Tenant Board" challenging "the Board’s termination of the tenancy for persistent late payment of rent and subletting the unit without the landlord’s consent", here a long-term 'rent strike' dispute.

The court considers the doctrine of both 'fresh law' and 'fresh evidence', here in this RTA s.210 appeal context:

[59] The tenants’ arguments invite this court to relitigate the abatement application. The court generally will not reassess or reweigh evidence that was before the initial decision maker: Mihindukulasuiriya v. WSIAT and Aramark Food Services, 2023 ONSC 3461 at para. 19.

[60] This court will also generally not consider evidence or issues that were not before the Board at first instance. The tenants complain about the Board’s disclosure rules in effect at the time of the first hearing, which did not require pre-hearing disclosure in advance of the hearing date. This changed in 2020, when the Board began holding virtual hearings. The tenants submit the lack of disclosure rules meant they were “blindsided” by the landlord’s evidence. There is no evidence on the record that the tenants raised this concern with the Vice-Chair on review. The court declines to deal with an issue that was not addressed with the decision-maker: Ali v. New Spadina Garment Industry Corp., 2020 ONSC 3244, at para. 41.