Jurisdiction (LTB - Re: Questions of Law and Fact): Difference between revisions

From Riverview Legal Group
Access restrictions were established for this page. If you see this message, you have no access to this page.
Line 17: Line 17:


==Kaiman v. Graham, 2009 ONCA 77 (CanLII)<ref name="Kaiman"/>==
==Kaiman v. Graham, 2009 ONCA 77 (CanLII)<ref name="Kaiman"/>==
[12] The appellants have framed the issue on appeal as being whether a declaration terminating their tenancy should be granted.  They submit that the Landlord and Tenant Board has exclusive jurisdiction to decide this issue: see generally, Part V of the RTA and s. 168(2).  However, their statement of claim does not contain a request for a declaration terminating a tenancy.  It requests a declaration that a tenancy exists.  The RTA does not confer jurisdiction on the Tribunal to determine whether there is a valid tenancy agreement.  The existence of a tenancy agreement is presumed: O’Brien v. 718458 Ontario Inc. (1999), 25 R.P.R. (3d) 57 (Ont. Gen. Div.).




Line 22: Line 24:


<ref name="Kaiman">Kaiman v. Graham, 2009 ONCA 77 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/228tk>, retrieved on 2021-03-09</ref>
<ref name="Kaiman">Kaiman v. Graham, 2009 ONCA 77 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/228tk>, retrieved on 2021-03-09</ref>
==References==
==References==

Revision as of 01:25, 10 March 2021


Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 17[1]

168 (1) The Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal is continued under the name Landlord and Tenant Board in English and Commission de la location immobilière in French. 2006, c. 17, s. 168 (1).

(2) The Board has exclusive jurisdiction to determine all applications under this Act and with respect to all matters in which jurisdiction is conferred on it by this Act. 2006, c. 17, s. 168 (2).

...

207 (1) The Board may, where it otherwise has the jurisdiction, order the payment to any given person of an amount of money up to the greater of $10,000 and the monetary jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court. 2006, c. 17, s. 207 (1).

(2) A person entitled to apply under this Act but whose claim exceeds the Board’s monetary jurisdiction may commence a proceeding in any court of competent jurisdiction for an order requiring the payment of that sum and, if such a proceeding is commenced, the court may exercise any powers that the Board could have exercised if the proceeding had been before the Board and within its monetary jurisdiction. 2006, c. 17, s. 207 (2).


[1]

Kaiman v. Graham, 2009 ONCA 77 (CanLII)[2]

[12] The appellants have framed the issue on appeal as being whether a declaration terminating their tenancy should be granted. They submit that the Landlord and Tenant Board has exclusive jurisdiction to decide this issue: see generally, Part V of the RTA and s. 168(2). However, their statement of claim does not contain a request for a declaration terminating a tenancy. It requests a declaration that a tenancy exists. The RTA does not confer jurisdiction on the Tribunal to determine whether there is a valid tenancy agreement. The existence of a tenancy agreement is presumed: O’Brien v. 718458 Ontario Inc. (1999), 25 R.P.R. (3d) 57 (Ont. Gen. Div.).



[2]

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 17, <https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/06r17>, reterived 2021-03-09
  2. 2.0 2.1 Kaiman v. Graham, 2009 ONCA 77 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/228tk>, retrieved on 2021-03-09