Dispute Resolution in Residential Tenancies (19:XII): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 386: | Line 386: | ||
NOTE: There is a filing fee, which cannot be recovered, but which can be waived under the same circumstances for which the original application fee can be waived. | :NOTE: There is a filing fee, which cannot be recovered, but which can be waived under the same circumstances for which the original application fee can be waived. | ||
NOTE: | :NOTE: Martin v. Barnett, 2015 BCSC 426 stands for the principle that a party must exhaust statutory review procedures before bringing an application for judicial review, but where the RTB does not have the power on reconsideration to encompass the alleged error (i.e. where the alleged error does not fall within one of the three grounds for Review Consideration), then reconsideration cannot be considered an adequate alternative to judicial review, and a party is permitted to proceed directly to judicial review. Where the error does fall within the reconsideration power of the RTB, the party must bring a reconsideration application. If they are dissatisfied with that result, a party can judicially review the review consideration decision. Wang v. Hou, 2019 CBC 353 adds that procedural fairness issues that cannot be raised on reconsideration can be the basis for independent judicial review of both original decisions and review consideration decisions if either raise procedural fairness issues. | ||
===''' 2. Time Limits for Launching a Review '''=== | ===''' 2. Time Limits for Launching a Review '''=== |