Simon's Legal Resources

RTA - LTB - Summary Dismissal [RTA s.197]

. 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.

Here the court considers the LTB's summary dismissal (including 'frivolous and vexatious') jurisdiction [RTA s.197]:

[61] These proceedings are intended to be summary in nature. The Board has a statutory obligation to adopt the most expeditious process that provides an adequate opportunity for the parties to know the issues and to make submissions. The standard is not perfection. The record shows both parties had the opportunity to file evidence and challenge the reliability of the other party’s evidence. The decision-making process was fair having regard to all the circumstances: Afolabi v. Law Society of Ontario, 2025 ONCA 257 at para. 60.

....

Vexatious Litigant Application

[65] The respondents requested a vexatious litigant order in written submissions. However, they did not make formal application for this remedy in these proceedings, nor was this court asked to review the Board’s disposition of a vexatious litigant application. The Courts of Justice Act permits a court to order that a person may not start or continue court proceedings and may order terms where the court is satisfied a person persistently and without reasonable grounds starts vexatious proceedings or conducts a proceeding in a vexatious manner. The Board is similarly authorized to dismiss an application, refuse to hold a hearing or give directions if the Board finds the matter is frivolous, vexatious, has not been initiated in good faith or discloses no reasonable cause of action: s. 197, Landlord and Tenant Board – Rules of Procedure, Rule A8.

[66] The purpose of a vexatious litigant order is to prevent an abuse of the Board’s or court’s process. The orders prevent litigants from harassing others and forcing them to incur unnecessary costs and protect society’s interests by limiting the needless diversion of finite court resources to private vendettas that do not give rise to any genuine legal claim. Abusive litigants should be screened out of the system so that parties with true justiciable disputes may have them adjudicated by the courts. Hallmarks of vexatious proceedings include unsustainable allegations and an unreasonable obsession with a cause: McLean v. Connell, 2025 ONCA 495, at paras. 16-24.

[67] Irrespective of whether the history of these proceedings justifies such an order, this court could not consider such a step without the process being initiated and followed as provided by the Board at first instance or as provided under the Rules of Civil Procedure. These reasons should not be interpreted as having substantively disposed of a vexatious litigant application, because no such proceeding was commenced.