Residential Tenancies Mental Health Problems A duty to accommodate and a tenant’s right to remain

Posted on by blogger

RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES: Mental Health Problems, a Duty to Accommodate, and a Tenant’s Right to Remain in their Home

By: Michael K.E. Thiele, B.A., LL.B., Plant Quinn Thiele LLP, Ottawa, Ontario Canada. Copyright 2007

The legislation governing most residential landlord and tenant relationships in Ontario is the Residential Tenancies Act S.O. 2006, c.17. (RTA). While the residential lease, written, oral, or implied, executed by the parties may inform the rights and responsibilities between the parties, the lease agreement may only establish those rights subject to the over-riding provisions of the RTA. In Ontario, the RTA applies to rental units in residential complexes despite any other Act and despite any agreement or waiver to the contrary. Further, where a provision in a tenancy agreement/ lease is inconsistent with the RTA or its regulations, that provision is void, and where the provision of another Act conflicts with the RTA the RTA takes precedence. In this regard, the freedom to contract is restricted; even prevented by the RTA, and appellate judicial pronoucement confirms that the RTA is effectively a complete code removing even the jurisdiction of the Superior Court in dealing with the relationship between landlord and tenant outside of the regime established by the RTA.

A recognized and statutorily mandated exception to the foregoing is the application of the Ontario Human Rights Code, the provisions of which take precedence over the provisions of the RTA. It is with respect to this exception that this paper is concerned, in the context of discussing recurring and difficult cases arising at the Landlord and Tenant Board, and how the Human Rights Code is helping tenants suffering from disabilities that cause behaviours which otherwise or normally would justify termination of their tenancies and eviction.

In practice before the Landlord and Tenant Board of Ontario, it has become increasingly apparent that a great number of tenants who are called upon to defend themselves and consequently their tenancies are suffering from some form of mental illness. In many instances, the mental illness is undiagnosed, but nevertheless is apparent to the observant onlooker. These tenants, but for the litigation support offered through Legal Aid Ontario, Community Legal Clinics, and generous lawyers, are left without the protections that one expects a Court to afford parties under disability. The Landlord and Tenant Board will allow proceedings to continue against a tenant, who by any reasonable measure would appear to be a party under disability, with the usual caveat being that they speak to duty counsel (who can not represent during the proceeding) prior to hearing.

Whether justice is wrought in these circumstances is a hard question; however, I believe it is fair to say that under these circumstances, the chance for injustice is greatly elevated. How then, and where, is the protection for parties under disability, for the mentally ill and infirm?

The starting point to deal with mental illness in residential landlord and tenant matters lies in the Ontario Human Rights Code R.S.O. 1990, c. H 19.. The code provides that -every person has a right to equal treatment with respect to the occupancy of accommodation, without discrimination because of race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status, disability or the receipt of public assistance-. A disability is defined to include a condition of mental impairment or a mental disorder.

In the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision in Werbeski v. Ontario (Director of Disability Support Program, Ministry of Community & Social Services), 2006 SCC 14 (S.C.C.) , the Court held that a provincially created statutory tribunal was obligated to follow the provincial human rights legislation when rendering its decision. The Court stated that statutory tribunals, which were empowered to decide questions of law, are presumed to look beyond the enabling statute, to apply the whole law to a matter properly before them.

The OHRC is a fundamental law. The Ontario legislature affirmed the primacy of the OHRC in the law itself, which is applicable both to private citizens and public bodies. Further, the adjudication of OHRC issues is no longer confined to the exclusive domain of the Ontario Human Rights Commission: OHRC, Section 34. The legislature has clearly contemplated that this fundamental law could be applied by the Court and other administrative bodies and has amended the OHRC accordingly.

In Werbeski , supra, the Supreme Court of Canada found that an administrative tribunal should apply the provisions of the OHRC when interpreting statutes because:

(i) The Ontario Human Rights Code states that it has primacy over other legislative enactments;

(ii) The recent amendments to the OHRC have removed the exclusive jurisdiction over interpretation and the application of the Code, from the Human Rights Commission.

In addition, the provisions of Section 11(2) and Section 17(2) and (3) of the OHRC specifically state that “a Court, as well as the Tribunal or the Commission, could apply these provisions of the OHRC when deciding if the needs of a person with a disability can be accommodated without undue hardship.” Section 47(2) of the OHRC states that the OHRC is paramount over other legislation. The Supreme Court of Canada has also held that the Human Rights Code takes precedence over agreements and contracts: Syndicat Northcrest c. Amselem, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 551 (S.C.C.).

APPLICATION TO LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD PROCEEDINGS

The Divisional Court in Walmer Developments v. Wolch, on a appeal from a decision of the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal (predecessor to the Landlord and Tenant Board), dealt with a situation where the tenant was diagnosed with schizophrenia. As a consequence of this condition, the tenant exhibited behaviours that included frequent screaming, throwing garbage loose in the halls, shouting profanity in the elevator, putting her property, such as her TV, out in the hall, and leaving food cooking on the stove unattended and hence filling the hall with smoke.

The Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal did not apply the Ontario Human Rights Code, and failed to give consideration to the implications of section 2 of the OHRC to the eviction proceedings before it. This was ultimately held to be in error as Section 17 of the Code provides:

17(1) A right of a person under this Act is not infringed for the reason only that the person is incapable of performing or fulfilling the essential duties or requirements attending the exercise of the right because of disability.

(2) The Commission, the board of inquiry or a court shall not find a person incapable unless it is satisfied that the needs of the person cannot be accommodated without undue hardship on the person responsible for accommodating those needs, considering the cost, outside sources of funding, if any, and health and safety requirements, if any.

After some discussion of issues pertaining to the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal’s ability to require accommodation (since ameliorated by statutory amendments), the Court held that a tenant suffering a disability has the protections of the OHRC, and most importantly that the question of accommodation shall be considered in the Tribunal’s/Board’s determination of whether to relieve from eviction under the discretionary provisions of the Tenant Protection Act/Residential Tenancies Act.

In Walmer, the appeal was allowed because it was ultimately demonstrated that the landlord could accommodate the tenant by notifying the tenant’s family of problems as they arose and that the tenant’s family could intervene. It was found that the tenant, when on her medication was controlled and her behaviour was then not objectionable.

Walmer, then, stands for the proposition that a landlord has a duty to accommodate a tenant who exhibits behaviours as a result of a disability, that otherwise would warrant termination and eviction, and where the accommodation does not amount to undue hardship, to actually take steps to assist the tenant in maintaining their tenancy by finding reasonable solutions to the problems alleged. Further, where a landlord fails to provide such accommodation, the Landlord and Tenant Board is directed to consider what may be a reasonable accommodation and where available, refuse termination and eviction to the landlord.

SINCE WALMER The Walmer decision has had the practical impact of sensitizing the Landlord and Tenant Board to the fact that many of the persons who appear before the Board are suffering from disabilities. While sensitized to the issue, it continues to be the case that the burden of establishing the existence of the disability; and further establishing what the reasonable accommodation may be; remains with the tenant. Where tenants do not have representation and/or do not have a support network the accommodation potential (and hence retention of the rental unit) offered by Walmer , is not pursued and hence is lost. Very clearly, in the Landlord and Tenant Board context, a human right is only a right if it is pursued and the Board will not, on an institutional basis assure that a mentally ill party is represented and that his/her human rights are asserted.

The Walmer decision has had a dramatic real life impact for many tenants. In particular, tenants suffering from schizophrenia, paranoid delusional disorder, dementia, alzheimers, hoarding instincts, and a host of other mental illnesses that from time to time cause behaviours that otherwise would warrant termination and eviction; now, are retaining their housing, with the landlord being required to take a little extra care for them. The Walmer development has been a positive change in that it has very clearly prevented homelessness of persons with mental illness who are able to be treated and who will function normally with the right support, understanding, and accommodation.

This is significant as the number of aging renters increases. Aging seniors, who haven’t had an issue with their landlords since the commencement of their tenancy are increasingly finding themselves before the Landlord and Tenant Board facing allegations of anti-social behaviours. Often these behaviours are age related as aging sometimes brings on mental illnesses or medical conditions that cause a person to exhibit anti-social behaviours. Often, these can be medically treated or ameliorated by additional care and support. These -mentally ill- tenants are often just regular folks whose entire life is subject to being turned upside down through eviction because they got sick. Through eviction they lose the stability that having a place to live gives, it robs them of peace, their routines, and likely exacerbates any medical condition or mental illness through the stress caused by the eviction.

While Walmer has been a tremendous help to many tenants by forcing the Landlord and Tenant Board to recognize -disabilities- and to impose accommodation of those disabilities where reasonable; the procedures of the Landlord and Tenant Board in adjudicating cases dealing with the mentally ill continue to disregard the fact that in many instances these tenants are not only mentally ill but incompetent as well. From the perspective of the Landlord and Tenant Board it never has a party before it that can be a -person under disability- as in the sense of the Rules of Civil Procedure. Query whether this is just.

CONCLUSION The issue that this paper started with remains unresolved. Persons suffering with mental illness still face procedural disadvantage at the Landlord and Tenant Board. The Landlord and Tenant Board can make a person homeless. Hopefully, the law will eventually recognize that the mentally ill and incompetent deserve procedural protection and it seems fair to suggest that one avenue to such protection is through the ideas expressed by the Court in Walmer.

Managing Your Monster-in-law

Posted on by blogger

A partnership together with the monster-in-law is most likely one of the most demanding for any new bride or groom. The monster-in-law is definitely an overbearing, pushy mother-in-law who does not respect boundaries and could continuously try and drive a wedge in between the newlyweds. Monster-in-law behavior can even carry on nicely into marriage. Listed here are some suggestions in coping with this sort of mother-in-law to ensure that your marriage stays robust and she a minimum of is aware of her location.

Your Partner

Mainly because the lady could be the mom of one’s partner, your partner must be the 1 to deal straight with her monster in law behavior. Eventually, a lot of girls experience undesirable and cast aside when their young children marry – all of a sudden there is a new man or woman that is certainly foremost from the grown child’s existence. Your partner must be the 1 to take the brunt in the discussions, concerns and challenges with her or his personal mom.

Go over along with your partner the require for boundaries and allow your partner set individuals up along with your mother-in-law. When discussions arise, under no circumstances get in touch with your mother-in-law names or make rude feedback. Merely state the details of her behavior. By way of example, as an alternative to saying, “She’s hates me and it is often attempting to obtain fault with me,” try and present the precise behavior, for example “Your mom often exhibits up unannounced after which helps make rude feedback about how messy the home is.” By setting distinct expectations along with your partner, your partner can then set them together with your mother-in-law.

Your Mother-in-Law

Usually stay polite and respectful along with your mother-in-law. Even when she barely disguises her dislike or distrust of you, polite behavior will give her small cause to gripe. Endeavor to get to understand her on a additional individual degree – you may advantage mainly because she’ll get to understand you like a man or woman in lieu of the 1 who took her youngster away. Inquire about her private interests and hobbies and try and see her as an independent lady.

Over all, maintain communication open. In lieu of communicating exclusively via your partner about tiny points, attempt calling her right. As an example, as opposed to just signing your mother-in-law’s birthday card, give her a contact and personally want her a joyful birthday.

Acceptance

Often even the very best of efforts do practically nothing to alter the monster-in-law behavior. In that instance, all you are able to do is keep polite, under no circumstances criticize her behavior to other people, continue to keep your sense of humor and, if it comes to it, possess a frank discussion along with your mother-in-law about her behavior. Just take into account that your partner ought to under no circumstances should pick out among you along with your monster-in-law and you may make it a additional quick existence by getting the open, comprehending and type man or woman your partner married inside the 1st location.

What Can You Expect Out Of Legal Case Management Software

Posted on by blogger

Law firm managers and partners will agree on the fact that they will do everything in their capacity to improve their range of services to their clients. At the same time, you will come across people who are not quite keen on investing in a Legal Case Management tool as they think that the return of investment does not match up to their expectations, especially when one considers the short term benefits. Though this kind of thinking may appear to be a sign of short-sightedness, there are several such instances.

Again, it would be a mistake to assume that a case management tool is a one-time deployment that can bring about a paradigm shift within a short span of time. It needs to be implemented in a proper way. It would end up creating a framework for the entire firm and help it to function as a consistent and cohesive unit. The tool can become an indispensable one for the firm’s staff, partners and associates and aid them in the accomplishment of their regular tasks. Here is a quick wrap-up of the long and short term benefits of using such software.

Long Term Benefits

Securing institutional knowledge and the assets of the firm Retaining the trusted clients and also developing a new base of clients steadily on grounds of providing excellent client services Prompting new employees to change gears and complete the task within the stipulated deadline Offering productivity metrics and firm management solutions

Short Term Benefits

Records billable time effectively Simplifies the process of conflict checking Provides access to all information concerning a particular case and also ensure proper communication from a central location using a single interface Making the intake process fully automatic Ensuring complete client satisfaction by offering substantive and time communications Saving on the time required for searching documents and every other bit of information To acquire all relevant information at a glance including information about witnesses, opposing counsel and judges along with the current status of the case Furnishing documents with key information automatically Creating alerts for the staff and attorneys whenever a new file is passed on to them Generating customised workflows for each and every practice area

There are several instances where you would find the adoption of such advanced technology generating short term results for your business. Even a couple of decades back, one could not imagine replacing the services of a seasoned typist for one who was just starting to learn keyboard commands required for word processing. But today you cannot deny the importance of using advanced technology for carrying out various tasks connected with case management. Legal case management software is thus no longer an alien concept in the legal field and is been taken up by solicitors across different parts of the world. However, the use of such software can begin only after you are clear about your requirements and the demands of your business.

Do Operators Run The Stock Market

Posted on by blogger

There is a general belief among most investors that markets are controlled by operators and it is no place for small investors. It is believed that the operators enriched themselves at the cost of small investors. Two scams of 1992 and 2002 had certain operators at the center of the storm. There were other star players in the market also in the past that had a big role to play in the market movements. Let us examine the validity of the statement that Stock Markets are run by operators.

An operator is a person who is supposed to drive the market price of a particular share that is he decides what should be the pricing of the share and whether it should go up or down. It is also believed that operators in association with the management of the company first acquire certain stocks in the market and subsequently through rumors and such other communication mechanism create a mass interest in the share. Subsequently once the general public starts believing in the companys prosperity the operators sells the shares and makes handsome profits. Some operators also use circuit mechanism of stock exchanges to hike the price. The circuit mechanism allows the operator to put an order at a price which is 3 to 8% above the previous days closing. Once the share hits upper circuit there are very few sellers in the market since they believe that if the share has hit upper circuit it is likely to go up further. This is the modus operandi of an operator. For an operator to be successful some factors are very
important. Such as connivance with the management, low capital base of the company so that manipulation can be done with very little capital and a mass following.

Is manipulation possible in high volume shares? Let us now look at the trading statistics reported by stock exchanges (data of a particular date). Top 30 scripts i.e. 10 in each group, account for 41% of turnover in NSE and 37% of the turnover in BSE. Both the Exchanges put together this translates in to a value of about 4100 crores on a daily basis. As per the market share reported of brokers by NSE (NSE Bulletin) top 10 trading members account for just 24% of the market share i.e. on an average each broker would have about 2.4% of the market across all company shares traded by the company. Hence, the dominance that a single broker can have on the volumes in the market is minimal in highly traded scrips.

Then we move to low value high volume traded scrips. As per the data is provided by newspapers separately on Quotations page, the aggregate value of shares traded in this category on a particular date was studied. The turnover for BSE in such scrips was Rs.34,03,470 i.e. .01% of total turnover and for NSE is Rs.20,28,050 i.e. 0.003% and in terms of number of shares traded it is 1.5 % in case of BSE and in case of NSE 0.45%. This is one area where low funds can help to move the prices and give a false sense of liquidity. Hence investors are advised to refrain from investing in scrip just because it is low value; the merit of the share should be looked into before making the investments.

The Stock exchanges have a system of guiding the investors on stock selection by way of classifying the companies into various groups. A group stocks are highly liquid and good performing companies. B1 group are again good performing companies with lesser liquidity then A group stocks. B2 are stocks that have low capital bases and less liquid. Companies that do not adhere to Listing agreement are categorized as Z group. These companies do not attend to investor complaints and fail to file various investor related information with the stock exchange such as quarterly working, book closure dates etc. Shares which have concentrated activity and unusual price movements are categorized in T 2 T or trade for trade settlement, ie every sale and purchase must result in delivery and positions cannot be squared off during the day. This classification should be kept in mind while selecting a company for investment. Stock exchanges also verify the news items appearing in leading

newspapers and get companies to clarify on rumours. This information is also of vital importance since operators and company managements at times plant false stories in newspaper to mislead the public.

Special laws have been put in place to act as deterrent to such manipulation. The Insider Trading Regulations and Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices regulations are the tools available to SEBI to taken action against those manipulating the markets. The punishment is maximum penalty of Rs. 25 crores and imprisonment. Both these laws have been enacted in early 2000. Hence their effectiveness will be proved only with efflux of time. Till the enactment of these laws the prosecution of persons indulging in market manipulation had to be tried under the general legal system, the delays in the same are not unknown to us.

We always blame the regulators, brokers and exchanges if scams happen in markets. However the menace of operators will go only if we stop following their leads in the market. Tips given by operators are widely followed, and so long as you make money on these tips we do not blame anyone. However once the operator weakens then there is fall in prices and the blame game starts. Operators are creations of society and the greed inherent in all of us. Easy money by riding the operators tips is a strong attraction. Scams bring down the prices of not only the shares which were manipulated by the operators but also all other fundamentally good shares also held by us. Mass following that the operators thrives on would be absent if we refrain from buying those shares that are remotely associated with any operator. Reporting wrongful activities of company managements, dabba traders and other market participants will help the regulator in directing their efforts on the wrong doers. Remember, being a spectator to a wrongdoing and not reporting the same is as bad as committing the crime.

Buy Methiopropamine Or Camfetamin – But Be Legally Secured

Posted on by blogger

Whenever we come across the term research chemicals, the adjectives that instantly come to our mind are hazardous, dangerous and harmful etc. It is natural for common man who is not professionally engaged with chemical science. The force strengthening this belief is that chemicals can harm anyone if handled improper way. The misuse of research chemicals may lead to many serious consequences which make be health oriented or legal. Camfetamine, Methiopropamine, Methoxetamine, 6-apb powder and Benzo Fury etc are commonly known and widely used research chemicals. Among these, Camfetamine and Methiopropamine (Class B chemical) are more in demand by the laboratories and industries.

Camfetamine is termed as N-methyl-3-phenyl-norbornan-2-amine. It is the analogue of in-famous Fencamfamine. At the moment, it is available only at leading online research chemicals stores. Many scientists are keen to use it to analyze it chemical and physical properties. Methiopropamine, also known as MPA, is thiophene-based analog of methamphetamine. It is chemically written as N-methyl-1-(thiophen-2-yl) propan-2-amine. It came into existence in 1942. It is almost similar to Methamphetamine. It became popular among the youngsters with the nick names of Whiz, Speed, Phet and Billy. Its sales in UK was allowed in December 2010. Just after its introduction, it gained popularity among the masses as recreational drug but very soon it was turned down because of its specific side effects as well as almost no interest of pharmaceutical industry.

However, some wasted social interests are also engaged in sourcing these to serve their unsocial purposes. Therefore, you need to be very cautious while buying it. To be on safer side, you must have legal reason and permission to source and use it. Any deviation in nature of declared usage may also land you behind the bars. If the selected source doesnt have AIRCR certification for selling Camfetamine, do not deal with it even if you are getting financial benefit.

Although suppliers or distributors of chemicals are already watchful while selling these chemicals but primary responsibility comes to the user. Nobody wants to let Camfetamin or Methiopropamine fall into wrong hands. It is reported that some people get these chemicals in bulk and resell them in retail at higher price for illegal purpose. To buy Methiopropamine or camfetamine is not an easy task if you are buying these chemicals legally. You need to furnish lot of documents. But if you have valid reason to use these chemicals, Government recognized agencies may supply these up to your end.