Finally Determined by the Board (LTB)

Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 ©
Date Retrieved:	2024-04-30
CLNP Page ID:	2298
Page Categories:	Hearing Process (LTB)
Citation:	Finally Determined by the Board (LTB), CLNP 2298, <https://rvt.link/9i>, retrieved on 2024-04-30
Editor:	Sharvey
Last Updated:	2023/11/03

Sapershteyn et al v. 1821317 Ontario Limited et al, 2023 ONSC 5977 (CanLII)

[1] 1821317 Ontario Limited and Group D Investments Inc. (hereinafter the landlord or appellants) appeal a decision of Vice Chair E. Patrick Shea of the Landlord and Tenant Board (the Board) dated November 2, 2022 (the final Order). The respondents obtained a final Order that section 135.1 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006[1] (RTA) did not apply to the unlawful rent increases of the landlord and consequently, the landlord was obligated to pay to the respondents the unlawful rent increases it received.

[2] The appellants contend that the decision of the Board that s. 135.1 of the RTA does not apply in the circumstances is an error in law. The appellants contend that the section does apply which means that the respondents are prohibited from receiving any repayment of the unlawful rent increases received by the appellants.

[3] For the reasons that follow, the appeal is dismissed.

...

[10] Beginning with the presumption that legislation does not have retrospective application, the Board found it “ambiguous” as to what the legislation means by “finally determined by the Board”.[5] To avoid an absurd interpretation, and in accordance with the Board’s obligation to adopt the most expeditious method of determining questions arising in a proceeding, the Board held that it could not have been the intention of the Legislature in an application pending before the Board: to deprive the tenant of recovery of what the parties agreed was illegal rent collected by the landlord based on the fact that the Board had not made the order directing the landlord to repay the 'illegal' rent it collected from the tenant - the only order that the Board would be expected to make in the circumstances - before s. 135.1 came into force on July 21, 2020.

[11] The Board found that the validity of the illegal rent charges had been finally resolved by July 21, 2020. At paragraph 40, the Board stated:

There was an interim order made in these applications by a Hearing Officer on May 26, 2020 in which a Hearing Officer directed, in part, that

On or before July 5, 2020, the Landlords shall give the Tenant and the Landlord and Tenant Board a statement confirming whether the figures and calculations regarding the illegal rent and the illegal charge provided by the Tenant are correct or not, and if not correct, then what are the discrepancies.[6]

...

[26] However, that does not mean the Board committed an error of law in its interpretation of the meaning of the provision. I do agree with the Board’s interpretation of “final determination,” that is, all issues arising from the application must be finally determined by July 21, 2020. This does not mean, as is the practice of the Board, that issues may be finally determined at different times during the application process. But as the Board found in this matter, all issues must be finally determined by July 21, 2020. Accordingly, I do not find that the Board erred in its interpretation of “finally determined by the Board.”