A landlord (Fok) was unsuccessful on judicial review of a decision of a dispute resolution officer under the Residential Tenancy Act, which had ordered the landlords to pay compensation to their former tenants for missing jewellery, and had denied the landlords’ claim for losses associated with repair, garbage disposal and cleaning, and found against them as to whether they had a legal right to change the locks and to retake actual possession of the rental unit

28. December 2010 0
Administrative law – Decisions of administrative tribunals – Residential Tenancy office – Landlord and tenant – Residential tenancy agreements – Conduct of tenant – Termination – Tenant’s goods – Damages – Judicial review – Evidence – Jurisdiction – Standard of review – Patent unreasonableness – Test Fok v. British Columbia (Residential Tenancy Act, Dispute Resolution ...

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. ...