Failed to Attend (Scheduling Mistake by Representative)(LTB): Difference between revisions
(Created page with "Category:Request to Review (LTB) {{Citation: | categories = [Request to Review (LTB)] | shortlink = }}") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| shortlink = | | shortlink = | ||
}} | }} | ||
==<i>Starlight Investments v Burns,</i> 2021 CanLII 147971 (ON LTB)<ref name="Burns"/>== | |||
2. For the following reasons, I find that the Landlord’s request for review should be granted. The Landlord’s legal representative says that they did not receive notice for the November 16, 2020, hearing. <b><u>The Board’s records indicate that a notice of hearing was sent by email to a paralegal who may, or may not, have been the Landlord’s legal representative at the time. At the review hearing, the Landlord’s legal representative explained that, at the time, the Landlord’s ownership was in a state of flux and it was not overly clear who was representing the Landlord at the relevant time.</b></u> I would also note that it is not clear from the Board’s records whether a notice of hearing was sent to the Landlord’s legal representative by mail. | |||
3. Based on the evidence before me, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the Landlord did not receive notice of the November 16, 2020, hearing and was not reasonably able to participate. For these reasons, I find that the Landlord’s request for review should be granted. | |||
==References== | |||
<ref name="Burns"><i>Starlight Investments v Burns,</> 2021 CanLII 147971 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/jntff>, retrieved on 2023-01-24</ref> | |||
Revision as of 17:50, 24 January 2023
| Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 © | |
|---|---|
| Date Retrieved: | 2024-11-24 |
| CLNP Page ID: | 2062 |
| Page Categories: | [Request to Review (LTB)] |
| Citation: | Failed to Attend (Scheduling Mistake by Representative)(LTB), CLNP 2062, <>, retrieved on 2024-11-24 |
| Editor: | MKent |
| Last Updated: | 2023/01/24 |
Need Legal Help?
Call (888) 655-1076
Join our ranks and become a Ninja Initiate today
Starlight Investments v Burns, 2021 CanLII 147971 (ON LTB)[1]
2. For the following reasons, I find that the Landlord’s request for review should be granted. The Landlord’s legal representative says that they did not receive notice for the November 16, 2020, hearing. The Board’s records indicate that a notice of hearing was sent by email to a paralegal who may, or may not, have been the Landlord’s legal representative at the time. At the review hearing, the Landlord’s legal representative explained that, at the time, the Landlord’s ownership was in a state of flux and it was not overly clear who was representing the Landlord at the relevant time. I would also note that it is not clear from the Board’s records whether a notice of hearing was sent to the Landlord’s legal representative by mail.
3. Based on the evidence before me, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the Landlord did not receive notice of the November 16, 2020, hearing and was not reasonably able to participate. For these reasons, I find that the Landlord’s request for review should be granted.
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Starlight Investments v Burns,</> 2021 CanLII 147971 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/jntff>, retrieved on 2023-01-24
