What Happens If You Need an Interpreter at a Hearing

Why language access matters at a hearing

An LTB hearing depends heavily on a party's ability to understand what's being said, respond clearly, and follow the back-and-forth between the adjudicator and both sides. For someone who isn't comfortable conducting this kind of proceeding in English, that's a genuine barrier to participating fully and fairly, regardless of how strong their underlying case might be. Recognizing this, the LTB generally makes interpretation services available so that language isn't the reason someone can't meaningfully take part in their own hearing.

This matters for both landlords and tenants. A tenant unfamiliar with English-language legal proceedings and a landlord in the same position face the same basic problem, and the availability of interpretation is generally not limited to one side of a dispute.

How to request an interpreter

Generally, a party who needs an interpreter should notify the LTB of this need as soon as possible, specifying the language required. This is often done when filing an application, responding to one, or as soon as a hearing date is received, though it can sometimes be requested later if the need wasn't apparent earlier. Providing clear and specific information — the exact language or dialect needed — helps the LTB arrange an appropriate interpreter rather than guessing at what's required.

It's generally a good idea to make this request in writing, so there's a clear record of when and how it was made, rather than relying solely on a phone call that might not be documented in the same way.

How far in advance to ask

There's no universally fixed number of days required for an interpretation request, but earlier is generally better. Interpreters, particularly for less common languages, may need to be scheduled in advance, and a request made only a day or two before a hearing may be harder to fulfill than one made weeks ahead. If a hearing date has already been set and interpretation hasn't yet been requested, making the request immediately — rather than waiting to see if it becomes necessary — is generally the safer approach.

For anyone uncertain whether they'll need an interpreter — for example, someone who manages daily English conversation but feels less confident navigating formal legal proceedings — it's generally reasonable to request one anyway, since the stakes of a hearing are higher than an everyday interaction.

What to expect from the interpreter's role

An interpreter's role is generally to accurately convey what's being said between the party and the adjudicator (and the other side), without adding their own opinions, advice, or commentary. They are not there to advocate for either party or to explain legal concepts beyond what's actually being said in the room — that role belongs to the party themselves or any representative they've retained. Understanding this distinction helps set realistic expectations: an interpreter makes the proceeding accessible in a particular language, but doesn't substitute for legal advice or representation.

It's generally helpful to speak in shorter segments when working with an interpreter, pausing to allow accurate interpretation, rather than speaking at length and hoping everything gets conveyed. Adjudicators who regularly work with interpreters are generally familiar with this rhythm and will usually allow for it.

Sign language and other accessibility needs

Interpretation needs aren't limited to spoken languages. Someone who is deaf or hard of hearing may need sign language interpretation, and the same general principle applies: requesting this accommodation as early as possible gives the LTB the best opportunity to arrange it properly. Other accessibility needs related to participating fully in a hearing — for reasons connected to disability more broadly — can generally also be raised with the LTB, and it's worth being specific about what's needed rather than assuming the Board will anticipate every requirement.

Accessibility and language access are related but distinct concerns, and a party with more than one need — for instance, both a hearing impairment and a language barrier — should generally communicate both clearly and as early as possible.

Can you bring your own interpreter?

In some circumstances, a party may wish to arrange their own interpreter rather than relying on one provided through the LTB — for example, someone they trust who is also familiar with the specific context of their situation. Whether this is permitted, and under what conditions, can depend on current LTB practice, so it's worth checking directly rather than assuming. One consideration worth keeping in mind is that an interpreter who is also a close family member or someone personally involved in the dispute may raise questions about neutrality, which could become relevant to how their involvement is treated.

Generally, using a qualified, independent interpreter — whether arranged by the party or provided by the LTB — tends to avoid complications that could arise from using someone too closely connected to the matter itself.

Interpretation during video or phone hearings

As more LTB hearings are conducted remotely, interpretation needs to work within that format as well. This generally means the interpreter joins the same video or phone session as the parties and the adjudicator, which can introduce its own practical considerations — making sure everyone can hear clearly, managing the back-and-forth without everyone speaking over each other, and ensuring a stable connection for all participants, including the interpreter. Testing the technology in advance, where feasible, and confirming that the interpreter has the same access instructions as the parties, generally helps the remote format go smoothly.

If connection problems specifically affect the interpreter's ability to participate, it's generally worth raising this immediately during the hearing rather than trying to push through without full interpretation, since that could affect how fairly the proceeding unfolds for the party who needs it.

If interpretation wasn't arranged in time

If a hearing date arrives and interpretation hasn't been arranged, despite an earlier request, it's generally worth raising the issue immediately — either before the hearing by contacting the LTB, or at the very start of the hearing itself, rather than attempting to proceed without adequate language access. Depending on the circumstances, the adjudicator may adjourn the matter to allow time for interpretation to be properly arranged, though this isn't guaranteed and depends on the specifics of the situation.

Proceeding with a hearing without adequate interpretation, when it was genuinely needed, risks a result that doesn't reflect what the party actually intended to communicate, which is exactly the kind of outcome the interpretation process is meant to prevent. It's also worth documenting, in writing where possible, when a request for an interpreter was made and what response, if any, was received. If a hearing does proceed without adequate interpretation and the party believes this affected their ability to participate fairly, that record can become relevant if they later want to understand what options, if any, exist for addressing the outcome — though any such option is generally limited and time-sensitive, and isn't something to count on as a safety net in place of requesting interpretation properly the first time.

The broader lesson is that interpretation isn't a formality that can be sorted out casually on the day. It's a genuine access issue that affects whether a hearing is fair in a meaningful sense, and treating the request with the same seriousness as any other deadline in the process tends to produce the best outcome for the party who needs it.

Frequently Asked Questions

Related reading

Reviewed by Ryan J. Manilla, BA, JD

Legal Reviewer · Landlord Tenant Ontario