Background:
Sangha, the respondent, made claims regarding water damage in the rental property she leased from Dahl and Drummond. The Residential Tenancy Branch arbitrator initially ruled on these claims. However, the petitioners challenged the arbitrator's decision through judicial review, seeking to have the award set aside, arguing that Sangha’s water damage claims were invalid and should be dismissed outright. The court previously found the arbitrator’s decision unreasonable and sent the case back to the RTB for a rehearing.

Legal Issues:
The main legal question was whether the arbitrator’s decision regarding the water damage claims was patently unreasonable. Dahl and Drummond argued that the water damage claims should have been dismissed without a new hearing, while Sangha maintained her right to pursue damages. The court rejected the petitioners’ request for dismissal and remitted the case to the RTB for further review.

Costs:
The petitioners sought costs on Scale B, plus double costs under Rule 9-1 based on two settlement offers. The court rejected double costs, awarding costs on Scale A due to the straightforward nature of the case. No specific total amount was awarded.