Citation: Sussex Realty Ltd. v. Swanson et al., 2011 MBCA 108 Date: 20111220 Docket: AI 11-30-07682 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA BETWEEN : SUSSEX REALTY LTD. ) ) C. Shewchuk (Landlord) Applicant ) on behalf of the Applicant ) - and - ) T. D.

Gisser ) for the Residential KELLIE SWANSON ) Tenancies Commission ) (Tenant) Respondent ) ) Chambers motion heard: - and - ) December 15, 2011 ) GARTH SWANSON ) Decision pronounced: ) December 20, 2011 (Guarantor) Respondent ) CHARTIER J.A. 1 The applicant landlord did not receive the full amount of its cleaning cost claim from the Residential Tenancies Commission (the RTC).

It moves for leave to appeal on the basis that the RTC erred in law by failing to take into account relevant evidence and by failing to rule on a damage issue that was before it. 2 I t is well settled that l eave to appeal may be granted only on a question of law or jurisdiction and, even then, only if the question has arguable merit and is one of sufficient importance to warrant the attention of this court. 3 After reviewing the written decision of the RTC itself, and after hearing from the representative of the applicant landlord, as well as Mr.

Gisser representing the RTC, I have concluded that even if I were to accept that the questions raised were questions of law, they have not, in my view, met the third criterion: be of sufficient importance to warrant attention from this court, in the sense that an appellate court decision would be helpful in determining similar disputes which are apt to arise in the future. Unfortunately for the applicant landlord, that is not the case here. 4 In the result, I must deny the application for leave to appeal. J.A.