Contract Out - RTA

From Riverview Legal Group


Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 ©
Date Retrieved: 2024-04-15
CLNP Page ID: 2180
Page Categories: Contract Law, Landlord & Tenant (Residential)
Citation: Contract Out - RTA, CLNP 2180, <https://rvt.link/50>, retrieved on 2024-04-15
Editor: MKent
Last Updated: 2023/03/23


Nicholls v. Zsiga, 2021 ONSC 6890 (CanLII)[1]

[16] Section 168 of the RTA provides that the LTB has exclusive jurisdiction to determine all applications under the RTA and with respect to all matters for which jurisdiction is conferred on it by the RTA. Section 3(1) of the RTA, on which the deputy judge relied, provides that the RTA “applies with respect to rental units in residential complexes, despite any other Act and despite any agreement or waiver to the contrary” (emphasis added). However, s. 194(2) of the RTA contains an exception to this basic prohibition against “contracting out”. Section 194(2) provides:

Despite subsection 3(1) and subject to subsection (3), a settlement mediated under this section may contain provisions that contravene any provision under this Act.

(...)

[22] Section 194(2) is confined to a very narrow set of circumstances. The parties must agree, as part of a mediated settlement before the LTB, to an action which might otherwise contravene a provision of the RTA and the LTB must be prepared to countenance that mediated settlement as being, not only in the party’s interests but in the broader public interest as well. It will be the rare case where this confluence of interests will align in this way. It will be the even rarer case (or perhaps never) where the LTB, in the role of mediator, will countenance the deferral of its jurisdiction over a residential tenancy claim in the absence of some compelling reason to do so. Within that narrow set of circumstances, however, the scope of the provision appears broad: “despite subsection 3(1) … a settlement mediated under this section may contain provisions that contravene any provision under this Act.”

[1]

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Nicholls v. Zsiga, 2021 ONSC 6890 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/jjr1w>, retrieved on 2023-03-22