) ) HONG XIA Appellant (Landlord) – v. –, 2017 ONSC 2302

CITATION : Xia v. Ma, 2017 ONSC 2302 DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 339/16 LTB NO.: TNT-76205-15 DATE: 20170412 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT NORDHEIMER, CORBETT and DI TOMASO JJ. BETWEEN: ) ) HONG XIA Appellant (Landlord) – and – MEILIN MA Respondent (Tenant) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Hong Xia, acting in person Meilin Ma, acting in person ) HEARD at Toronto: April 12, 2017 NORDHEIMER J. (Orally) [ 1 ] Mr. Xia, the landlord, appeals from an order of the Landlord and Tenant Board that required him to pay to Ms.

Ma, the last month’s rent deposit along with out-of-pocket expenses incurred by her, a small rent abatement, and other costs. [ 2 ] The landlord complains that he did not get notice of the hearing before the Board and, thus, was not in attendance when the order was made. The landlord then sought, and was granted, a review of the Board’s order. On that review, the Board rejected the landlord’s contention that he was not given proper notice of the proceeding.

The Board found that notice had been given to the landlord, both by mail and by voice mail message, and that, if those notices did not reach the landlord, it was through the fault of the landlord. The Board confirmed the order. [ 3 ] This court only has jurisdiction to entertain appeals from the Board on questions of law. Even assuming, for the moment, that the landlord’s complaint about notice is a question of law going to the Board’s jurisdiction, the standard of review to be applied is still one of reasonableness.

The Board is interpreting and applying its home statute, and its decisions, in that regard, are entitled to deference. [ 4 ] There is nothing unreasonable about the Board’s conclusion regarding the issue of notice. As the Board said, on the review: The landlord cannot rely on having inadequate mail delivery or choosing to not turn on his phone when they are the tenant’s means of contacting him, as a basis for claiming he was unaware of the hearing. [ 5 ] There is no basis for this court to interfere with the conclusion reached by the Board. [ 6 ] The appeal is dismissed.

COSTS [ 7 ] I have endorsed the Appeal Book and Compendium as follows: “This appeal is dismissed for oral reasons. No costs.” ___________________________ Nordheimer J.

I agree ___________________________ Corbett J. I agree ___________________________ Di Tomaso J. Date of Reasons for Judgment: April 12, 2017 Date of Release: April 13, 2017 CITATION : Xia v. Ma, 2017 ONSC 2302 DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 339/16 LTB NO.: TNT-76205-15 DATE: 20170412 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT NORDHEIMER, CORBETT and DI TOMASO JJ BETWEEN: HONG XIA Appellant (Landlord) – and – MEILIN MA Respondent (Tenant) ORAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT NORDHEIMER J. Date of Reasons for Judgment: April 12, 2017

Date of Release: April 13, 2017