The Court granted a petition for judicial review of a decision of the Residential Tenancy Branch, which had ordered the Respondent landlord to pay $1,500 in damages to his former tenant, the petitioner. The petitioner had complained that his landlord had unlawfully disposed of his personal possessions while he was away from his apartment. The statutory obligations of the landlord under section 25(1) of the Residential Tenancy Act, in relation to abandoned goods, did not apply to the facts. The dispute resolution officer’s decision to award damages based on the irrelevant consideration of non-existent statutory breaches by the landlord, without considering the tenant’s rights as a bailor at common law, was patently unreasonable.

26. January 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Residential Tenancy office – Landlord and tenant – Residential tenancy agreements – Termination – Tenant’s goods – Bailee – Damages – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation Bello v. Ren, [2009] B.C.J. No. 2323, 2009 BCSC 1598, British Columbia Supreme Court, November 23, 2009, L. Fenlon J. ...

The application by a tenant (“Ganitano”) for judicial review of a decision and Order of a residential tenancy dispute resolution officer dismissing Ganitano’s application to dispute a 10-day notice and one-month notice to end tenancy was allowed where the Court found there were a number of procedurally significant problems in the Hearing which infringed Ganitano’s right to be heard on the application

28. July 2009 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Residential Tenancy office – Adjudication – Landlord and tenant – Residential tenancy agreements – Termination – Hearings – Conduct of hearings – Failure to provide transcript of hearing – Judicial review – Procedural requirements and fairness – Limitations Ganitano v. Metro Vancouver Housing Corp., [2009] B.C.J. No. ...

The Court held that Section 49 of the Residential Tenancy Act, S.B.C. 2002, c. 78 could not be read so as to give landlords the discretion to terminate tenancies on the sole basis that they would be financially advantaged in having vacant possession. Where an Arbitrator makes a finding of fact that the renovation sought by the landlord did not require vacant possession, the rational and reasonable decision is that vacancy notices should not be granted in favour of the landlord.

22. May 2007 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Arbitration Board – Landlord and tenant – Residential tenancy agreements – Vacancy notices – Judicial review – Compliance with legislation – Statutory interpretation Allman v. Amacon Property Management Services Inc., [2007] B.C.J. No. 433, British Columbia Court of Appeal, March 6, 2007, Levine, Thackray and Lowry JJ.A. The landlord ...

A tenant (“Sullivan”) was successful in appealing the dismissal of her petition for judicial review of an arbitration decision that dismissed her claim to set aside a notice to terminate her tenancy. The arbitrator had dismissed Sullivan’s claim for failing to apply within the time limit. The Court of Appeal held that it was unfair of the arbitrator not to canvass the question of an extension of time with the lay litigant.

23. August 2005 0
Administrative law – Landlord and tenant – Residential tenancy agreements – Termination – Arbitration – Limitations – Extension of time – Judicial review – Natural justice – Procedural requirements and fairness Sullivan v. Strata Plan BCS-251, [2005] B.C.J. No. 1350, British Columbia Court of Appeal, June 17, 2005, Ryan, Mackenzie and Low JJ.A. In the course of ...

The Ontario Court of Appeal set aside the Superior Court’s Order requiring the Appellants to vacate a residential premises, on the basis that the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal had exclusive jurisdiction to make such an Order

28. June 2005 0
Administrative law – Landlord and tenant – Residential tenancy agreements – Termination – Judicial review – Jurisdiction of court – Remedies – Injunctions – Availability Beach v. Mofatt, [2005] O.J. No. 1722, Ontario Court of Appeal, May 3, 2005, M.A. Catzman, M. Rosenberg and R.G. Juriansz JJ.A. The Appellants were the residential tenants of an illegal rooming ...

The appeal by the B.C. Housing Commission (the “Commission”) of a decision of the Supreme Court reversing an arbitrator’s decision allowing the termination of Schubach’s tenancy was dismissed. The Court of Appeal held that a landlord of a complex of residential buildings was not entitled to terminate the tenancy of a tenant in one of the buildings because of acts committed in another of the buildings by a person that the tenant “permitted in or on the residential property or residential premises”.

27. January 2004 0
Administrative law – Landlord and tenant – Residential tenancy agreements – Termination – Conduct of tenant – Residential premises – Definition – Residential property – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Housing Commission – Jurisdiction – Judicial review – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness Schubach v. British Columbia (Housing Management Commission), [2003] B.C.J. No. 2664, British Columbia Court ...