Does a Deputy Rentalsman have to meet the burden of proof that an executed copy of the lease has been delivered to the tenant?

In the present case, rather than determining whether the landlord had met the burden of proof that an executed copy of the lease had been delivered to the tenant in accordance with s. 10 of The Residential Tenancies Act, supra, the Deputy Rentalsman instead determined whether the tenant had suffered any prejudice as a result of not getting a copy of the tenancy agreement fully executed by the landlord. While the Deputy Rentalsman purported to be following the reasoning of Ball J. in the Prudhomme v. Vangool case, supra, it must be pointed out that the appeal in the Prudhomme v. Vangool case, which Ball J. was deciding was in respect to a breach of s. 20(1) of the Act, not s. 10 or s. 11 of the Act. In fact, as noted in the previous paragraph hereof, Ball J. specifically noted that a breach of ss. 10 or 11 suspends the tenant’s obligations under the tenancy agreement as per s. 12.