Edison Rental Agency v. Date:, 2011 MBCA 13

Citation: Edison Rental Agency v. Date: 20110203 Klippenstein, 2011 MBCA 13 Docket: AI 10-30-07425 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA B E T W E E N : ) L. P. Klippenstein EDISON RENTAL AGENCY ) on his own behalf ) (Landlord) Respondent ) J. M. Woolley ) for the Respondent ) - and - ) S. D.

Boyd ) for The Residential ) Tenancies Commission LARRY PETER KLIPPENSTEIN ) ) Chambers motion heard: (Tenant) Applicant ) January 20, 2011 ) ) Decision pronounced: ) February 3, 2011 FREEDMAN J.A. 1 The applicant seeks leave to appeal an order (the Order) of the Residential Tenancies Commission (the Commission) made August 6, 2010. He had claimed compensation for rent, loss of personal property and costs.

The Commission dismissed his claim. 2 The applicant argued that the Commission was in a conflict of interest, that he did not have adequate representation, and that there was a religious bias in the Commission’s proceedings based on the Bible that had been offered to him for oath-taking purposes. 3 The applicable principles were articulated by Chartier J.A. in Edison Rental Agency v. Klippenstein , 2008 MBCA 114 (in chambers) (at para. 3 ): …. Leave will be granted only on a question of law (or one of jurisdiction) which is not intertwined with factual determinations made by the Commission.

In addition, the applicant must have an arguable case on the merits, one which has a reasonable prospect of success, and the question raised must involve a matter of public interest that is one of sufficient importance to warrant consideration by the Province’s highest court. …. 4 In my opinion, there is no merit to the applicant’s arguments. There is no evidence of any conflict of interest, the applicant had a considerable period of time to obtain assistance at the Commission’s hearing, and there is no basis to find any bias of any kind regarding the use of a Bible for the taking of an oath.

In fact, in this case, the applicant promised to tell the truth and no Bible was used. 5 There is no arguable case here which has a reasonable prospect of success, nor are any questions raised meeting the high standard described by Chartier J.A. 6 The respondent sought costs if the application was to be dismissed, on the basis that this was the fifth proceeding between the parties.

7 Notwithstanding the respondent’s request for costs, I dismiss the application and make no order as to costs. J.A.