Nyman v. Sherrah

Nyman v. Sherrah

The petition is dismissed because the arbitrator acted within jurisdiction conferred by ss.84 and 18(1) of the Residential Tenancy Act, service was properly effected or evasion shown so proceeding in the tenant's absence was not clearly wrong, and there was some evidence reasonably supporting the arbitrator's...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2004 BCSC 789
Parties
Petitioner: Dorinda Ruth Nyman; Respondent: John Sherrah
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of Arbitration Award / Final Judgment
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Arbitration, Service of Documents, Natural Justice, Standard of Review, Damages, Security Deposit, Jurisdiction, Timeliness
Source Language
english
Residential Tenancy Law Administrative Law Contract Arbitration Service of Documents Natural Justice Standard of Review Damages +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dorinda Ruth Nyman

Petitioner

John Sherrah

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review of Arbitration Award / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator breached rules of natural justice by proceeding in tenant's absence due to alleged lack of service
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator had jurisdiction to award damages under the Residential Tenancy Act
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's findings were supported by evidence or were patently unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The petition is dismissed because the arbitrator acted within jurisdiction conferred by ss.84 and 18(1) of the Residential Tenancy Act, service was properly effected or evasion shown so proceeding in the tenant's absence was not clearly wrong, and there was some evidence reasonably supporting the arbitrator's findings such that the decision was not patently unreasonable; costs awarded to respondent on Scale 3.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Petition dismissed
  • Arbitration award dated March 25, 2003 upheld