Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Timeliness of the tenant’s appeal in relation to the 30-day statutory deadline under the Residential Tenancies Act

• Limits on the Landlord and Tenant Board’s authority to review its own decisions and the prohibition on multiple review requests for the same order

• Whether the tenant’s repeated review requests and late appeal constitute an abuse of process

• Application of Rule 2.1.01 to summarily dismiss proceedings that appear frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process

• Requirements for bringing a motion to extend the time to appeal, including necessary factors to be addressed

• Obligation of self-represented litigants to comply with court rules despite unfamiliarity with the process

Facts of the case

Ashley Manor Housing Corporation, the landlord/respondent, and Hopeton Malcolm, the tenant/appellant, were parties to a proceeding before the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB). The LTB issued a decision on March 26, 2025. On the same day, the tenant filed a motion to set aside the order, which was dismissed on May 21, 2025. On June 1, 2025, the tenant filed a request to review the order as permitted by section 209(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act. The request to review was dismissed by the LTB on July 9, 2025. The July 9, 2025 decision was the final order of the LTB. The tenant did not appeal this order within 30 days, as required by section 210 of the Residential Tenancies Act.

Instead, the tenant requested a review of the review order on July 15, 2025, which was denied by the LTB on August 13, 2025. On August 21, 2025, the tenant filed another request to review, which was dismissed by the LTB on August 27, 2025, citing the Board’s Rules of Procedure that prohibit further requests to review the same order or review order from the same party. The tenant filed a Notice of Appeal dated September 12, 2025, seeking to appeal from the LTB’s review order dated August 13, 2025.

Discussion of policy terms and relevant statutory provisions

Sections 209 and 210 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 17, were discussed. Section 209(1) states that, except as otherwise provided, an order of the Board is final and binding. Section 209(2) allows the Board to review a decision if a party was not reasonably able to participate in the proceeding. Section 210(1) provides that any person affected by an order of the Board may appeal to the Divisional Court within 30 days after being given the order, but only on a question of law. The LTB’s Rule 26.18 states that the LTB will not consider a further request to review the same order or to review the review order from the same requesting party.

Procedural history and abuse of process concerns

The court noted that the tenant’s Notice of Appeal appeared on its face to be out of time, as it was not from the final decision of March 26, 2025, or the review decision of July 9, 2025. Seeking multiple reviews of the same order was found to be an abuse of process. The court referenced Rule 2.1.01, which allows the court to stay or dismiss a proceeding if it appears to be frivolous, vexatious, or otherwise an abuse of process of the court.

Court’s analysis and outcome

The appellant, Hopeton Malcolm, provided a response explaining why he was in arrears with his rent, his efforts to resolve the matter, and his lack of familiarity with the appeal process as a self-represented litigant. The court acknowledged this but emphasized that self-represented litigants are still required to comply with court rules. The court found that the tenant’s appeal was out of time. While the court can extend the time to bring an appeal, the tenant would need to bring a motion for an extension of time addressing specific factors: intention to appeal within the relevant time, the length of and explanation for the delay, prejudice to the respondent, the merits of the appeal, and whether the justice of the case requires granting an extension. The respondent must be given an opportunity to respond to such a motion, which may be brought in writing under Rule 37.12.1.

Ruling and overall outcome

The appeal was dismissed, without prejudice to the tenant’s right to bring a motion for leave to appeal. No specific amount was ordered in favor of the successful party, Ashley Manor Housing Corporation, and the decision does not specify any monetary award or costs. The total amount ordered in favor of the successful party cannot be determined from the decision.