Devoid of Merit (Appeal - LTB): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Access restrictions were established for this page. If you see this message, you have no access to this page.
mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
[36] An appellate court may quash an appeal where it is manifestly devoid of merit: <i>Leysork Holdings Ltd. v. Munden Acres Ltd. (1976) O.R. (2d) 430, 1976 CarswellOnt 300 (CA) at para. 18; Solomon v. Levy, 2015 ONSC 2556 at para. 34.</i><ref name="Solomon"/> | [36] An appellate court may quash an appeal where it is manifestly devoid of merit: <i>Leysork Holdings Ltd. v. Munden Acres Ltd. (1976) O.R. (2d) 430, 1976 CarswellOnt 300 (CA) at para. 18; Solomon v. Levy, 2015 ONSC 2556 at para. 34.</i><ref name="Solomon"/> | ||
:... | |||
[39] I find that the Tenant’s appeal is devoid of merit. I further find that it does not raise a question of law, which is required in order to appeal under s. 210 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 17. I explain my reasons for this finding below. | |||
<ref name="Capreit">Capreit v. Veiga, 2022 ONSC 958 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/jmkdf>, retrieved on 2022-04-03</ref> | <ref name="Capreit">Capreit v. Veiga, 2022 ONSC 958 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/jmkdf>, retrieved on 2022-04-03</ref> | ||
Revision as of 16:17, 3 April 2022
| Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 © | |
|---|---|
| Date Retrieved: | 2024-11-23 |
| CLNP Page ID: | 1898 |
| Page Categories: | [Appeals] |
| Citation: | Devoid of Merit (Appeal - LTB), CLNP 1898, <>, retrieved on 2024-11-23 |
| Editor: | Sharvey |
| Last Updated: | 2022/04/03 |
Need Legal Help?
Call (888) 655-1076
Join our ranks and become a Ninja Initiate today
Capreit v. Veiga, 2022 ONSC 958 (CanLII)[1]
[36] An appellate court may quash an appeal where it is manifestly devoid of merit: Leysork Holdings Ltd. v. Munden Acres Ltd. (1976) O.R. (2d) 430, 1976 CarswellOnt 300 (CA) at para. 18; Solomon v. Levy, 2015 ONSC 2556 at para. 34.[2]
- ...
[39] I find that the Tenant’s appeal is devoid of merit. I further find that it does not raise a question of law, which is required in order to appeal under s. 210 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 17. I explain my reasons for this finding below.
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Capreit v. Veiga, 2022 ONSC 958 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/jmkdf>, retrieved on 2022-04-03
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Solomon v Levy, 2015 ONSC 2556 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/gh8jg>, retrieved on 2022-04-03
