Unforeseen Circumstances

Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 ©
Date Retrieved:	2024-05-06
CLNP Page ID:	1889
Page Categories:	Set Aside
Citation:	Unforeseen Circumstances, CLNP 1889, <6b>, retrieved on 2024-05-06
Editor:	MKent
Last Updated:	2022/03/16

TSL-72425-16-SA (Re), 2016 CanLII 39790 (ON LTB)

11. In my view, the purpose of subsection 78(11) of the Act is to capture situations where after the order, something unforeseen/unexpected or beyond the tenants’ control occurred which made it impossible for the tenants to comply with the order. In this case, the Tenants want me to accept that the unforeseen event is that they had additional expenses due to their daughter’s medical condition. I do not accept that this was an unforeseen event. I say this because this issue arose on March 18, 2016 which was three days prior to the hearing. When the Tenants proposed the payment plan, they knew or ought to have known about these expenses from March 18, 2016 and should have taken this into consideration when they proposed and agreed to the payment plan. Also, the Tenants confirmed that they had funds but chose to use the funds towards other expenses. I appreciate the Tenants have other expenses, but they should have ensured that some funds were directed towards the arrears on March 26, 2016.

TNL-02529-18-SA (Re), 2018 CanLII 113920 (ON LTB)

7. In my view, the purpose of subsection 78(11) of the Act is to capture situations where after the order is issued, something unforeseen/unexpected or beyond the tenant’s control occurred which made it impossible for the Tenant to comply with the order. In this case, the Tenant wants me to accept that the unforeseen event is that he did not get the loan he expected from his friend. This may have been unforeseen by the Tenant.

8. This may have been a situation to set aside the order because the Tenant was unable to comply with the order because of not getting the loan. However, I must also consider whether I am “satisfied, having regard to all the circumstances, that it would not be unfair to set aside the order.”

New Hope Non Profit Dwelling (Durham) Inc v Oberding, 2020 CanLII 117739 (ON LTB)

9. In my view, the purpose of subsection 78(11) of the Act is to capture situations where after the order, something unforeseen/unexpected or beyond the tenant’s control occurred which made it impossible for the tenant to comply with the order. In this case, the Tenant wants me to accept that the unforeseen even is that she encountered problems getting her cheque from OW on time and then had to cash the cheque and use the Landlord’s new rent payment system. I can understand that this may have caused the Tenant being late for the May 1, 2020 payment, however it does not explain why she continued to pay the rent and the arrears late.

10. As I stated at the hearing, notwithstanding the Tenant’s ongoing breaches, I will give the Tenant one more opportunity to continue the tenancy. I did so because the Tenant assured the Board that she is able to pay the rent and the arrears when due on the first day of the month. I also considered that the Tenant has been paying the rent and the arrears, albeit, late, and has not fallen further into arrears.

TEL-02351-10-SA (Re), 2010 CanLII 13761 (ON LTB)

1. Due to employment/financial related issues, the Tenant contacted the Landlord to seek an extension of time to make the January 1 and January 18, 2010 payments. The Tenant testified that he received the Landlord’s approval to make the payments as soon as possible, which he did on approximately January 26.

(...)

6. This is not a case where the Tenants has blatantly disregarded the terms and conditions of the agreement. I accept the Tenant’s account of events, that due to unforeseen circumstances, he was unable to make the January payments as required, and he advised the Landlord accordingly.

7. In my view, based on the provisions of section 78(11) (b), the Act anticipates that unforeseen circumstances may sometimes disrupt plans/agreements; and for this reason, in making findings, the Board must look beyond the act of the breach itself and examine all of the circumstances as it affects both parties, before making a decision whether to set aside the order or not.

(...)

8. In this case, all of the agreed payments have been made to date, and therefore I find no prejudice to the Landlord if the order was set aside and the medicated agreement allowed to continue. At the same time, the Tenants would have the opportunity to maintain the tenancy providing the remaining terms of the mediated agreement are met.