Elsie Kalu (pictured right), an Ottawa Solo landlord has launched on December 2022 a proposed class action suit against the Ontario government for “constructive taking” due to “government policies incentivizing tenants to live rent free in her home and fundamentally steal from her and her autistic child”.
Elsie’s lawyer argue that the government controlling the private properties of landlords in Ontario amount to “legalized theft” by depriving small landlords of use of their property without compensation. The perennials delays at the Landlords and Tenants Board (LTB) – the body created by the Ontario government to adjudicate disputes – have caused “undue hardship and financial burden for landlords in Ontario many incurring tens of thousands of losses with an average wait time of upward to 10 months” to issue a decision regarding hearings under the Residential and Tenant Act (RTA) enacted by the province.
Since this case is similar to many other landlords in Ontario and it has been documented on the Ombudsman Report all victims of the LTB “broken system” the lawyer is asking as a remedy, a compensation in a class action that will include all Ontario landlords impacted by this government policy.
Of course, the government’s lawyers disagree and have filed a motion to reject the case. The trial will take place at the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario in Cayuga, south of Hamilton in Haldimand county.
Both arguments – government and the landlords – are now on the public domain. The presiding judge is Michael J. Valente who ruled against the Waterloo municipal government on the issue of homeless shelters erected at a city park
From the government lawyers the motion is asking the judge to dismiss the case because there is “no chance of it being successful”. A classic argument and a filtering mechanism used by a defendant with unlimited resources. The main arguments for the government are that it was acting within its right and the claims
- fail to plead a a reasonable cause of action
- does not proves that the province has expropriated or give a beneficial interest or advantage to the state
- does not remove landlord “reasonable use” of the property
- does not specify a specific remedy
Details are in the 42 pages factum below citing the Crown Liability Proceeding Act (CLPA) as defense
Factum – Moving Party – HMKRO – 09-AUG-2023
The rebuttal from the landlord’s lawyer is succinct and citing a case law argue that “if an acquisition of a beneficial interest or advantage, by the state, in the property or flowing from it; and all reasonable uses of the properties are being removed then a common law right to compensation is triggered.”
For the law firm representing Elsie “de facto expropriation is about government action that affects a property owner’s rights (…) focused on whether government action crosses the threshold from ordinary regulation in the public interest, to the exercise of control in a manner more consistent with the hallmarks of private ownership.”
The full 27 pages rebuttal is on the link below
Factum-Respondent-Kalu. 24-AUG-2023
The hearing will take place on September 22nd, 2023 at 9 am at Ontario Court of Justice in Cayuga, Ontario located at the Cayuga Courthouse on 55 Munsee St. N. Cayuga, Ontario N0A 1E0
Several solo landlords are planning to make their presence known whether in a peaceful silent protest outside or inside the court room to hear the arguments. They can be contacted at protest@solo.ca
