OHRC Submission on Regulatory Proposal to Limit the Landlord and Tenant Board’s Ability to Set Aside an Eviction order

May 1, 2026

1. Introduction 

In November 2025, the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) provided feedback on Bill 60: Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 and its Schedule 12, which amended the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 (RTA).

The OHRC welcomes the opportunity to offer submissions on four proposed regulations implementing Bill 60 amendments to sections 58(1.1), 77 (8)(b) and 94.10(8)(b); 82(2); and 83(1)(b) and 94.12(1)(b) of the RTA. These proposed regulations, if passed, would

• require the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) to find that a tenant/non-profit housing co-operative member has persistently paid rent late if at least three rent payments were late within a six-month period;¹ 
• set limits on when the LTB can set aside an eviction order where the landlord and tenant have come to an agreement to end the tenancy;²
• limit when the LTB can postpone the enforcement of an eviction order;³ and
• require a tenant to pay 50% of rent arrears at least 7 days before a rent-arrears hearing to raise certain issues at the hearing.⁴

The proposed regulatory changes, alone and cumulatively, create additional barriers for tenants at the LTB and constrain the LTB’s discretion to consider a tenant’s circumstances, potentially leading to avoidable or unnecessary evictions. This is likely to adversely affect tenants who identify by Code grounds including persons with disabilities, Indigenous persons, racialized persons, lone parents (who are predominantly women), newcomers and public assistance recipients.

The government should use a human rights based approach to regulations that may disproportionately affect these groups and create or contribute to systemic discrimination. 

This submission identifies human rights concerns and provides human rights-based recommendations on the Regulatory Proposal to Set Limits to the Landlord and Tenant Board's Ability to Set Aside an Eviction Order.

Rental Housing and human rights

Housing is a necessity and essential to human dignity and is recognized as a human right under international law and Canadian federal law.⁵ The Ontario Human Rights Code (Code) has primacy over other provincial legislation, including the RTA. The Code prohibits discrimination in housing and services. Therefore, the RTA must comply with the Code, and the LTB must consider and apply the Code when exercising its authority under the RTA. This includes when deciding to refuse or postpone an eviction⁶ for example by considering whether the tenant’s conduct was connected to a disability and/or whether the landlord has met their Code obligations.⁷ 

The LTB is also required to ensure its processes are procedurally fair, accessible and provide accommodation up to the point of undue hardship. This is necessary to ensure all persons have adequate opportunity to know the issues to which they must respond and be heard before the LTB.⁸

Not all tenants are aware of their rights under the Code and may face overlapping barriers asserting their rights before the LTB. Persons with mental health or physical disabilities may lack pre-hearing support or advocacy resources. Newcomers and tenants with language barriers may be unable to submit evidence or understand procedural requirements. Indigenous tenants may face systemic disadvantages, including limited access to legal counsel or culturally appropriate services. Many groups may face challenges accessing legal advice, or meeting tight or inflexible timelines. Removing flexibility from LTB proceedings entrenches systemic disadvantage by disproportionately affecting those who already face additional barriers in housing and legal processes.⁹

In addition, the substantive changes to the RTA and in the proposed regulations have the potential to adversely affect individuals protected under the Code who are more likely to be tenants, experience poverty or have lower average incomes than the general population. Low income is connected to grounds such as age, ancestry, disability, ethnic origin, family status, gender identity, place of origin, race, or being in receipt of public assistance.¹⁰ There is a link between poverty and increased eviction filing rates likely due to the heightened chance of arrears when tenants have low incomes.¹¹ For instance, people with disabilities are more likely to miss a rent payment, and financial hardship is a main reason they are forced into homelessness, which they are four times more likely to experience than the total population.¹²

People with disabilities are also more likely to live in rented accommodation in need of major repairs than the total population.¹³ Similarly, new immigrant groups and racialized minorities, including ‘Black’ Africans, are more likely than non-immigrants to live in poor-quality housing.¹⁴ Tenants are often unable to hold landlords accountable for the state of the property until they raise these issues at a rent arrears hearing.¹⁵ 

In addition to being more likely to face evictions,¹⁶ certain Code-protected groups are more likely to be discriminated against in securing rental housing¹⁷ and experience homelessness as a result.¹⁸ For example, Black communities experience the highest rate of homelessness of any racialized (non-Indigenous) community in Canada¹⁹ and also disproportionately experience evictions.²⁰ Indigenous people are overrepresented among people experiencing homelessness21 and are more likely to be part of the “outdoor” or “unsheltered” homeless populations.²² They experience unique barriers to access to justice due to the impact of colonialism and trauma. ²³ Therefore, Bill 60 amendments to the RTA and associated regulatory changes which increase the risk of eviction or eviction into homelessness, raise significant human rights concerns. 

 2. The OHRC’s Submissions

Human rights-based concerns with preventing the Landlord and Tenant Board from considering a “change in the tenant’s circumstances” 

If a landlord and tenant agree to end a tenancy, the landlord can apply to the LTB for an eviction order without providing notice to the tenant and the LTB can issue an eviction order without a hearing. The tenant can make a motion to the LTB to have the eviction order set aside if they can show that, having regard to all the circumstances, it would not be unfair to set aside the eviction order. The proposed regulation adds a condition preventing the LTB from considering a “change in the tenant’s circumstances” when deciding whether to set aside an eviction.

A change in a tenant’s circumstances could be Code-related or due to other extenuating reasons. The primacy of the Code requires the LTB always consider any Code-related reason to set aside an eviction order. However, the proposed regulation is not clear that the prohibition on considering a change in the tenant’s circumstances does not apply where the change is connected to a Code ground, for example, if the tenant develops a disability.

Even if the Code is not directly engaged, a change in a tenant’s circumstances may result from systemic disadvantage. For example, a tenant facing financial precarity who loses their job after coming to an agreement with the landlord may not be able to secure alternative housing and may ask to set aside an eviction order so they can remain housed. Preventing the LTB from considering a change in circumstances could increase the likelihood of a tenant being evicted into homelessness, disadvantaging many Code-protected groups who already face higher rates of eviction, discrimination when trying to secure rental housing, and homelessness.

3. The OHRC’s Recommendations

1. Do not prevent the LTB from considering a change in the tenant’s circumstances when determining whether it would be unfair to set aside an eviction order.

2. In the alternative, explicitly state that the prohibition against considering a change in a tenant’s circumstances does not apply if the change is connected to a ground under the Ontario Human Rights Code or if other extenuating circumstances arising after the agreement is created would result in the tenant being evicted into homelessness.