Building Permits

Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 ©
Date Retrieved:	2024-04-28
CLNP Page ID:	2190
Page Categories:	Renovations and Repairs (LTB)
Citation:	Building Permits, CLNP 2190, <https://rvt.link/5h>, retrieved on 2024-04-28
Editor:	Sharvey
Last Updated:	2024/04/11

Residential Tenancies Act,, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 17

Demolition, conversion, repairs

73 (1) The Board shall not make an order terminating a tenancy and evicting the tenant in an application under section 69 based on a notice of termination under section 50 unless it is satisfied that,

(a) the landlord intends in good faith to carry out the activity on which the notice of termination was based; and

(b) the landlord has,

(i) obtained all necessary permits or other authority that may be required to carry out the activity on which the notice of termination was based, or

(ii) has taken all reasonable steps to obtain all necessary permits or other authority that may be required to carry out the activity on which the notice of termination was based, if it is not possible to obtain the permits or other authority until the rental unit is vacant.

Determination of good faith

(2) In determining the good faith of the landlord in an application described in subsection (1), the Board may consider any evidence the Board considers relevant that relates to the landlord’s previous use of notices of termination under section 48, 49 or 50 in respect of the same or a different rental unit

Application of subs. (2)

(3) Subsection (2) applies with respect to any application described in subsection (1) that,

(a) is made on or after the day section 13 of Schedule 4 to the Protecting Tenants and Strengthening Community Housing Act, 2020 comes into force; or

(b) was made before that day and was not finally determined before that day.

Jia v De Oliveira, 2022 CanLII 94603 (ON LTB)

8. This means the Landlords must meet a two-part test: that the work proposed is so extensive that it requires a building permit and that in order for the work to be conducted, vacant possession is required.

9. The problem with the Landlords’ application is that the Landlords have failed to obtain any building permits for the proposed work as mandated by subsection 50(1)(c) which is a condition or taken all reasonable steps to do so. In fact, the Landlords’ evidence was, according to the City, no permits are required for this work.

10. A plain reading of subsection 50(1)(c) is clear that a landlord’s application may not succeed if no building permits are required to do the repairs or renovations. The Board cannot terminate a tenancy if no permits are necessary.

11. Had the legislature intended that a landlord be able to terminate a tenancy and evict a tenant for the purpose of performing renovations or repairs that do not require a building permit it would not have drafted s. 50(1)(c) as it did so. The language of the section expressly says that the renovations be “so extensive” that they require both a building permit and vacant possession.

12. Based on the evidence before the Board, I am not satisfied that the Landlords have met the two-part test and established that it had taken all reasonable steps to obtain the necessary permits to conduct the extensive repairs and renovations or that it is necessary to have vacant possession of the rental unit to conduct these extensive repairs or renovations. As such, the Landlords’ application must be dismissed.

TSL-04926-19 (Re), 2019 CanLII 87561 (ON LTB)

7. There is no dispute that a building permit is not required for replacement of knob and tube wiring since the only authority legally authorized to approve electrical work and to issue a permit to undertake electrical work is the ESA. While there is an argument to be made that an ESA “permit” is an “other authority” as stipulated in s. 73, the provision of the Act which allows a Landlord to seek termination is s. 50 a liberal interpretation of s. 73(a) cannot be employed to cure the defect under s. 50(1)(c).

8. The Landlord’s Legal Representative submitted that his clients attempted to obtain the necessary building permits but were refused by the City staff because building permits are not generally issued for electrical work.

9. The Landlord called their general contractor SM as a witness, but not the master electrician who would be performing the work. The general contractor confirmed that a building permit is not necessary to replace knob and tube but stressed that one may subsequently be required on the advice of an architect depending upon the state of the wiring. However, he was not able to address the scope of the electrical work, nor was he able to explain why the wiring work could not be performed in cascading fashion to minimize the disruption to the Tenants.

10. SM also testified that water and power would be shut off during the work and stressed that in his opinion the residential complex would be uninhabitable during the work.

11. I am of the view that had the legislature intended that a Landlord be able to terminate a tenancy and evict a Tenant for the purpose of performing renovations or repairs that do not require a building permit it would not have drafted s. 50(1)(c) as it did. The language of the section expressly says that the renovations be “so extensive” that they require a building permit and vacant possession. I do acknowledge that it may be necessary to obtain a building permit should the scope of the work require it, but the application seems premature until that need is known.

Kukielka v Arn, 2022 CanLII 80927 (ON LTB)

52. In the event building permits are in fact required, subsection 73(1)(b) of the Act states that the Board shall not terminate a tenancy unless the landlord has obtained in advance all necessary permits or other authority that may be required to carry out the activity

on which the notice of termination was based, or the landlord has taken all reasonable steps to obtain all necessary permits or other authority if it is not possible to obtain the permits or other authority until the rental unit is vacant.

(...)

71. The renovations listed in the N13 Notice are extensive. Removing drywall, plumbing, electrical wires and duct work and replacing these require substantial work and would reasonably take more than a few days to complete. The disruption to the Tenant would be significant. The supply of vital services, such as water and heat, would be interrupted during this period. If the work set out in the N13 is accomplished, the Landlords would necessarily require vacant possession of the unit.

72. I find that the Landlords have failed to obtain, or to take all reasonable steps to obtain, the proper permits in respect of the N13 Notice prior to the hearing.

73. The only authority the Landlords have obtained to date is an expired permit for “alterations” to an interior and possibly an exterior wall, possibly to one or two doors, and adding minor items which do not require a permit. There are no other notations or directions, particularly about major items, made by the zoning official, who was assigned to ensure that the renovations comply with the Building Code and Zoning-By-Law.

74. None of these alterations are listed in the N13 Notice. No evidence was led by the Landlords to establish that the Landlords have taken all reasonable steps to date to either renew the expired permit or obtain the necessary permits to conform with the Notice.