The Plaintiff landlord applied to the Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service when the Defendant tenants failed to pay their rent. The Residential Tenancy Board granted a Consent Order (“RTDRS Order”) that the next rent payment had to be made by a certain date, and the Order was converted into a Court Order. The tenants failed to appeal the Residential Tenancy Order. Two of the tenants received funds from Government agencies, and they missed their Court ordered rent payment when the agency failed to provide the required funds. The landlord evicted the tenants who then applied to return to the premises. The landlord resisted the Application, arguing that the tenants had not properly applied to appeal the Order and could not seek the relief requested.

Master Schlosser noted that Rule 9.17 allowed the RTDRS Order to be filed in the Court of Queen’s Bench for enforcement purposes. Master Schlosser then canvassed a variety of methods to grant the tenants standing to seek the requested relief under the Judicature Act, RSA 2000, c J-2 and the Civil Enforcement Act, RSA 2000, c C-15, and observed that Rules 9.14, 9.15 and 9.16 allow the Court to deal with Orders, but the Rules would have limited applicability in the circumstances.

Master Schlosser stated further that Rule 1.5 allows a Court to cure irregularities in commencement documents and other pleadings, if there is no prejudice. The focus under Rule 1.5 is on substance and not form. Master Schlosser noted that the Application could have been treated as a Notice of Appeal seeking a variation of the prior RTDRS Order. This amendment could be made to the Pleadings document under Rule 1.5 with only minor changes required, and no prejudice would result.