Sign in
Canada Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Canada Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Canada decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Residential tenancy law 2026 BCCA 197

Singh v. Toor

The application for an interim stay is dismissed because the chambers judge correctly found no serious issue to be tried under s.58(2) — the commercial and residential matters are not substantially linked — and the applicant cannot show irreparable harm since staying the lower court's refusal would not prevent enforcement of the RTB possession order; therefore the balance of convenience favors the respondent.

  • Stay of proceedings
  • Jurisdiction
  • Judicial review
  • Possession order
  • Irreparable harm
  • Statutory bar s.58 residential tenancy act
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2026 BCCA 220

Percival v. Ti Developments Ltd.

Application for a stay was dismissed because the appeal and underlying judicial review were of little merit, there was insufficient evidence of irreparable harm, and the balance of convenience favoured the respondents given the appellants' delay and repeated procedural abuses; deference to Justice Hewson's discretionary case management decision warranted upholding the cancellation of the stay.

  • Judicial review
  • Stay of proceedings
  • Eviction
  • Res judicata
  • Procedural fairness
  • Balance of convenience
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2026 BCCA 172

Bennett v. Seto

The chambers judge did not err: the arbitrator's pointed questioning occurred after the bulk of evidence and was directed to specific, relevant contradictions (Facebook posts) affecting credibility; although some interventions (including a compliance referral remark) were unnecessary, they were not systemic or extensive enough, in context, to create a reasonable apprehension of bias and did not render the process procedurally unfair, so the appeal is dismissed.

  • Reasonable apprehension of bias
  • Judicial review
  • Procedural unfairness
  • Compensation under s.51 rta
  • Tribunal questioning and interventions
Read case analysis
Residential tenancy law 2026 BCCA 163

Sull v. Trevitt

The arbitrator's award was patently unreasonable because he based compensation on the alleged invalidity of the s.49 notice rather than applying s.51(2)'s statutory test of whether the stated purpose was accomplished within a reasonable time and failed to consider extenuating circumstances under s.51(3); the matter is remitted to the RTB to decide only whether the landlord or buyers should be excused under s.51(3) and to consider notice to the buyers and any abandonment of amounts above the statutory cap.

  • Compensation under s.51 rta
  • Notice to end tenancy s.49 rta
  • Standard of review - patent unreasonableness
  • Extenuating circumstances s.51(3)
  • Rtb jurisdiction and monetary cap s.58
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2026 BCSC 658

Liu v. Wuzheng

The petition is dismissed because the RTB provided a fair process (opportunities to present evidence and multiple adjournments), the landlord failed to demonstrate she was prevented from adducing evidence, the Merits Decision was supported by evidence and not patently unreasonable, and the landlord cannot collaterally attack an earlier unreviewed RTB decision; onus was on the landlord under s.51(2) RTA to prove occupation and use.

  • Standard of review
  • Onus of proof under rta s.51(2)
  • Reconsideration/review of tribunal decisions
  • Collateral attack on prior administrative decisions
Read case analysis
Civil procedure 2026 BCCA 131

Kong v. Siddoo Kashmir Holdings Ltd.

Application dismissed because appellant failed to establish a serious issue to be tried, provided no evidence of irreparable harm, and the balance of convenience favoured the landlord; a stay would not affect enforcement of the possession order and would permit resiling from a freely made settlement; chambers judge's discretionary decision was not shown to be in error.

  • Stay of proceedings
  • Order of possession
  • Settlement enforcement
  • Judicial review
  • Irreparable harm
  • Balance of convenience
Read case analysis
Residential tenancy law 2026 BCSC 274

Randhawa v. Langarica

The arbitrator's decision was patently unreasonable because it failed to provide adequate, non-absurd reasoning on whether extenuating circumstances excused the landlords under s.51.1 and misapplied the statute by treating the vacate clause as continuing to bind despite unexplained conclusions about how the tenancy ended; the proper remedy is to set aside and remit the matter to the Residential Tenancy Branch for further hearing.

  • Vacate clause
  • Tenant compensation under s.51.1
  • Extenuating circumstances defence
  • Standard of review (patent unreasonableness)
  • Adequacy of tribunal reasons
  • Remittal to tribunal
Read case analysis
Residential tenancy law 2026 BCSC 253

Stewart v. Birnie

The court upheld the RTB factual finding on timely service as not patently unreasonable and upheld the RTB review decision refusing to admit the additional evidence on review, but found the original RTB hearing procedurally flawed because the arbitrator admitted the tenant's untested hearsay evidence while excluding the landlord's unserved documentary evidence without offering or explaining the option to adjourn or otherwise enabling the landlord to respond; accordingly the appropriate remedy is to remit the matter to the RTB for a new hearing where both parties may submit evidence in advance…

  • Notice to end tenancy for landlord's use
  • Procedural fairness
  • Admission and exclusion of evidence
  • Service of documents
  • New evidence on review
  • Compensation under rta s.51
Read case analysis
Civil procedure 2026 BCCA 46

Sefcikova v. Orca Realty Inc.

The general rule in s.44 of the Court of Appeal Act awards costs to the successful party; appellants failed to show any conduct in the appeal proceedings that would disentitle respondents to costs, and allegations of misconduct pertained to the trial court and were unsupported by the record, therefore respondents are entitled to costs.

  • Costs of appeal
  • Entitlement to costs
  • Self-represented litigants
  • Conduct of litigation
Read case analysis
Administrative law 2026 BCCA 33

Kassam v. 1129728 B.C. Ltd.

The arbitrator's decision was patently unreasonable because she repeatedly misstated and conflated the statutory test—treating 'extenuating circumstances' as 'exceptional circumstances'—and relied on irrelevant good faith/section 49.2 analogies and timeline findings that undermined the required s.51(3) analysis; given legislative amendments limiting the Director's monetary jurisdiction, the appropriate remedy is remittal to the Supreme Court for rehearing rather than to the RTB; the Director, not named in the notice of appeal, must be added by application under the Court of Appeal Rules.

  • Remittal
  • Jurisdiction
  • Extenuating circumstances
  • Good faith
  • Standard of review
  • Procedural fairness
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Canada decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.