Rarotonga, 2010

Simon's Megalomaniacal Legal Resources

(Ontario/Canada)

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | SPPA / Fairness (Administrative)
SMALL CLAIMS / CIVIL LITIGATION / CIVIL APPEALS / JUDICIAL REVIEW / Practice Directives / Civil Portals

Home / About / Democracy, Law and Duty / Testimonials / Conditions of Use

Civil and Administrative
Litigation Opinions
for Self-Reppers

Simon's Favourite Charity -
Little Friends Lefkada (Greece)
Cat and Dog Rescue


TOPICS


RTA - Notice of Termination

. Cowton v. Landlord and Tenant Board

In Cowton v. Landlord and Tenant Board (Div Court, 2024) the Ontario Divisional Court considers the duty to give notice of termination under the RTA:
[17] ... The RTA doesn’t require the landlord to give the tenant notice. It only has to give an adult in the rental unit a copy of the notice. It also doesn’t require that person to give the tenant notice. As there was no dispute that Leonard gave Patrick the notice, it doesn’t matter if he then gave Rilene or Emily the notice. As a result, Rilene and Emily had notice of termination.

[18] In this court, Rilene and Emily argue that the hearing was procedurally unfair because the Board “found that the N4 was correctly served before finding that the Appellants were in a joint tenancy with the other tenants.” In other words, the Board denied the appellants procedural fairness by deciding the service issues first. They say they were denied the opportunity to argue that they weren’t a joint tenancy once the Board decided the service issue.

[19] I don’t agree with appellants. “Service is the fundamental start of the proceeding. It is the act that invites the defendant into the Court’s process. It initiates the right to take part.” See Darlind Construction, Inc. v Rooflifters, LLC, 2009 CanLII 13617, at para 31. The Board was correct to determine whether Emily and Rilene were served before it heard their arguments on the merits. As disclosed by the Board’s reasons, it then considered, at paragraphs 18 to 22 of the decision, whether Rilene and Emily were joint tenants with Patrick and Jayson. Rilene and Emily were given ample opportunity to challenge service, and then dispute Leonard’s position on the form of the tenancy.
. Leaf v Gonzalez

In Leaf v Gonzalez (Div Court, 2023) the Divisional Court held that any inadequacy in an RTA Notice of Termination was an error of (at most) mixed fact and law, and thus not appealable under RTA s.210 (which only allow appeal of 'questions of law'):
[4] The first issue raised by the Appellants is not a question of law alone. They complain about the sufficiency of notice and that it did not meet the requirements of s. 65 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 17. In particular, that by failing to state the specific times when the Tenants smoked marijuana in their unit, the notice was deficient and denied them procedural fairness.

[5] Subsection 43(2) of the Act provides that a notice of termination “shall also set out the reasons and details respecting the termination ...”. Similarly, section 65(2) of the Act requires the landlord to “set out the grounds” for the termination in the notice. It is not a question of law alone whether the details or grounds must include times. Rather, the issue of the sufficiency of the notice is dependent on the circumstances, or facts of each case.

[6] Counsel for the Appellants took us to cases she suggested make times of events a requirement of all notices. See: Metro Capital Management Inc., Re, 2002 CarswellOnt 8691, [2002] O.J. No. 5931; York University v York, 2021 CanLII 139918 (ON LTB); HOL-04139-19 (Re), 2019 CanLII 87555 (ON LTB); Parent v Girard, 2021 CanLII 143620 (ON LTB). However, those cases must be considered in context. In some cases, specific times may be necessary to provide adequate notice, but those cases do not amend the Act, which does not require specific times be included in notices. What the Act requires is that notice provides the “grounds” or “reasons” for termination, not times.



CC0

The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.




Last modified: 17-12-24
By: admin