What a Review Request Actually Changes (and What It Doesn't)
How a request to review an order differs from an appeal.
Insights · LTB Hearings & Process
On this page
What a request to review an order actually is
Once the Landlord and Tenant Board issues an order, many people assume the only way to challenge it is to appeal to a court. In practice, the LTB has its own internal process first: a request to review the order. This asks the Board — generally a different adjudicator from the one who made the original decision — to look again at whether that decision should stand, be changed, or be cancelled entirely, without involving a higher court at all.
A review request is generally a creature of the Board's own rules rather than a right spelled out in detail in the Residential Tenancies Act itself. It exists to catch situations where something went wrong in how the original order came about — not simply to give a dissatisfied party a second attempt at the same argument. Understanding that distinction is the single most useful thing to take from this article, because it shapes almost everything about whether a review is likely to help in a given situation.
How a review differs from an appeal
An appeal goes outside the LTB entirely, to the Divisional Court, and is generally limited to questions of law — not simply a disagreement with how the adjudicator weighed the evidence or decided the facts. A review, by contrast, stays inside the Board and can, in some circumstances, revisit how the case was handled procedurally, or whether new evidence that wasn't reasonably available before should change the result.
The two processes also run on different timelines and have different triggers. A review request is generally made within a short window after the order was issued, while an appeal has its own separate filing deadline and requires a more formal court process. Filing one doesn't automatically preserve your ability to file the other, so the distinction matters from the very start, not just as an afterthought once a decision looks unfavourable.
Key point
A review request is not simply a chance to re-argue the same case to a sympathetic ear. The Board generally expects a specific, recognized basis for reopening the matter — not just dissatisfaction with the outcome.
Grounds the LTB may consider on review
The LTB's rules generally set out specific categories of grounds that can support a review request. These typically include a serious error in the order itself, such as a mistake about a party's identity or an error apparent on the face of the decision; a party not receiving proper notice of the hearing and therefore being unable to participate; new evidence that wasn't reasonably available at the time of the hearing and that could have changed the outcome; or a breach of the rules of procedural fairness, such as being denied a reasonable chance to present a case.
None of these grounds are automatic wins. Raising one generally means explaining, with some specificity, how it actually affected the outcome — not just pointing to a technical issue in isolation. An adjudicator reviewing the request will generally consider whether the problem identified was serious enough that it's reasonably likely to have changed the result, not whether the process was flawless in every small respect.
What a review request doesn't change
It's just as important to understand what a review generally does not do. It's not a route to relitigate factual findings simply because one side disagrees with how the adjudicator weighed conflicting testimony. If both parties told their story and the adjudicator believed one over the other, that's typically the kind of finding a review won't disturb — that disagreement belongs, if anywhere, in an appeal on a genuine question of law, and even there only in limited circumstances.
A review also generally doesn't pause enforcement of the order automatically just because it's been filed. In many cases the original order can still be acted on while a review request is pending, unless the Board specifically decides otherwise. That's a detail people are sometimes surprised by, and it's worth confirming directly with the LTB or a legal professional before assuming that filing a request buys automatic breathing room.
How and when to file a review request
A review request is generally made using a specific LTB form, filed within a set number of days after the order is issued — the Board's own rules set out the exact window, and missing it can mean losing the option altogether. The request generally needs to identify which specific ground it relies on and explain, in concrete terms, why that ground applies to this particular order rather than simply asserting unhappiness with the result.
Supporting documents matter here. If the basis is new evidence, it generally helps to explain clearly why that evidence wasn't available earlier and what difference it would have made. If the basis is a lack of notice, details about what address or method was used and why it failed to reach the party can be central to whether the request is taken seriously.
What happens after you file
Once a review request is filed, it's generally assigned to an adjudicator, who may decide the matter can be resolved based on the written materials alone, or may schedule a further hearing to hear from both sides. The other party is generally given a chance to respond to the request before any decision is made, so this isn't a one-sided process — both sides typically get to weigh in on whether the review should proceed.
Timelines for this stage can vary considerably depending on the Board's caseload and the complexity of the issue raised. It's generally worth checking in on the status of a pending request periodically rather than assuming silence means nothing is happening, and keeping a clear paper trail of what was filed and when.
Possible outcomes of a review
A review can end in a few different ways. The adjudicator may refuse to review the order at all, generally because the request didn't raise a recognized ground or didn't show the issue was serious enough to matter. The adjudicator may review the order and confirm it, leaving the original decision in place. Or the adjudicator may change or cancel the original order, sometimes after a new hearing on some or all of the issues involved.
Because the range of outcomes is genuinely open, it's worth going in with realistic expectations rather than assuming a review automatically means a second chance at a full win. In many cases a review simply confirms the original decision stood on solid ground.
Common misconception
Some people believe filing a review request automatically delays or cancels an eviction or other enforcement step. That's generally not the case — the original order can often still be enforced unless the Board specifically says otherwise.
Choosing between a review and an appeal
Deciding whether to pursue a review, an appeal, or both generally comes down to what actually went wrong. If the complaint is about a procedural problem, missed notice, or genuinely new evidence, a review is often the more direct and less costly route. If the complaint is about a genuine legal error — the adjudicator misapplying the Residential Tenancies Act itself, for example — an appeal on a question of law may be the only avenue available, since reviews generally aren't designed to correct legal interpretation disputes.
Because the deadlines for each process are tight and run independently, it's generally wise to get a clear picture of both options as soon as an unfavourable order arrives, rather than defaulting to one path and later discovering the other has already closed.
This article provides general information about Ontario landlord and tenant law.
It is not legal advice. For advice about a specific situation, consult a licensed
paralegal or lawyer, or contact the Landlord and Tenant Board.
Frequently Asked Questions
A review stays inside the LTB and generally addresses procedural problems or specific recognized grounds, while an appeal goes to the Divisional Court and is generally limited to questions of law.
The LTB's rules generally set a specific, fairly short window after the order is issued. Check the order itself and the Board's current rules, since missing the deadline can mean losing the option.
Generally not automatically. The original order can often still be enforced while a review is pending unless the Board specifically orders otherwise.
Generally no. A review request needs a recognized ground, such as a procedural error or new evidence — simple disagreement with the outcome usually isn't enough on its own.
Generally, evidence that wasn't reasonably available at the time of the original hearing and that could have changed the outcome, rather than evidence that simply wasn't brought forward but could have been.
Generally, yes — either party to the original order can request a review if they believe a recognized ground applies to them.
Generally not — a review is typically assigned to a different adjudicator than the one who issued the original order, though practices can vary.
If a review is refused, the original order generally remains in effect. Depending on the circumstances, an appeal on a genuine question of law may still be available within its own deadline.
It's generally not required, but because review requests must identify a specific recognized ground, getting advice from a licensed paralegal or lawyer can help clarify whether a realistic basis exists.
Fee requirements can change, so it's best to confirm the current amount, if any, directly with the LTB when filing. A fee waiver may be available in some circumstances based on financial need.
Related reading
Reviewed by Ryan J. Manilla, BA, JD
Legal Reviewer · Landlord Tenant Ontario