Background:
Hill received an order for $16,480, equivalent to 12 months’ rent, due to Qi’s failure to fulfill the conditions for ending the tenancy as required under Section 51(2) of the Residential Tenancy Act. Qi claimed that extenuating circumstances prevented her from using the rental unit as intended for her daughter and son-in-law after Hill vacated.

Legal Issues:
The key issues involved whether Qi had proven extenuating circumstances that would excuse the compensation and if the RTB decision had procedural fairness. Qi argued that new evidence existed and alleged that the RTB decision was obtained by fraud. The Court reviewed whether the RTB's findings were patently unreasonable and if procedural fairness was observed.

Decision:
The court dismissed the petition, affirming that the RTB's decision was not patently unreasonable. It held that Qi failed to provide sufficient evidence of extenuating circumstances. Additionally, Qi's arguments regarding the fairness of the proceedings were rejected.

Costs:
The court awarded costs to Nicholas Hill, and it also lifted the stay of the RTB decision, making the award of $16,480 payable by Qi to Hill.