Eviction, Disability, and Proportionality: A Recent LTB Closing Submission

At Apuntar Legal Services, our work is grounded in one core principle: housing stability matters. For many of our clients, maintaining their tenancy is directly tied to health, dignity, and long term well being.

In a recent matter before the Landlord and Tenant Board, we represented a tenant living with a disability who was facing eviction based on allegations of aggressive conduct. The case required the Board to consider not only what occurred, but whether eviction was a legally and proportionately justified remedy in all of the circumstances.

The Landlord relied on video evidence showing the Tenant kicking an office door and testimony that she pushed a staff member during an emotionally charged interaction. The Tenant did not dispute that these events took place. The focus of our submissions was not denial, but context and proportionality.

There was no evidence of injury to any staff member. No criminal charges were laid despite police attendance. There was no evidence of weapons, ongoing threats, or escalating violence. The incidents were brief and reactive, not sustained or part of a demonstrated pattern of dangerous behaviour.

The Landlord also referenced prior complaints from other tenants. However, those complaints were not formally investigated or substantiated. Allegations alone cannot establish a proven pattern of serious misconduct. The evidentiary burden remains on the applicant to demonstrate that eviction is warranted.

A central issue in the case was disability.

Our client suffered a serious accident and now lives with chronic pain and related mental health challenges. These conditions affect daily functioning and emotional regulation. At the time of the incidents, she was medically vulnerable. Importantly, she has since engaged in therapy and counselling and is actively participating in treatment. There have been no further incidents since she began receiving support.

Under the Ontario Human Rights Code, disability is a protected ground. Housing providers have a duty to accommodate to the point of undue hardship. Where behaviour is connected to disability, the analysis must include whether accommodation and appropriate supports can address the conduct, rather than resorting immediately to eviction.

Eviction is the most serious remedy available to the Board. It results in the loss of housing and can have significant and lasting consequences, particularly for individuals managing health conditions. For that reason, it should be reserved for situations involving ongoing risk or clear danger to others.

LTB Closing Submission

In our LTB closing submission, we argued that the evidence demonstrated a moment of poor judgment during a period of significant physical and psychological distress, not an ongoing threat to the residential community. The Tenant expressed remorse, accepted responsibility, and has taken concrete steps to ensure there will be no recurrence.

We respectfully requested that the application be dismissed. In the alternative, we submitted that a conditional order, if necessary, would be a more appropriate and proportionate response than termination of the tenancy.

This case highlights the importance of contextual analysis in eviction proceedings, particularly where disability is involved. At Apuntar Legal Services, we are committed to ensuring that human rights principles, statutory obligations, and proportionality remain central to the Board’s analysis.

For those interested in understanding how these legal arguments are presented in practice, a video of the full closing submission has been made available on YouTube.

If you are a tenant facing eviction and believe disability or other protected grounds may be a factor in your case, we encourage you to seek legal advice. Early intervention and informed advocacy can make a meaningful difference.