Notice Law - Non-Payment of Rent (N4): Difference between revisions

From Riverview Legal Group
Access restrictions were established for this page. If you see this message, you have no access to this page.
(Created page with "Category:Landlord Tenant ==Landlord Not Correctly Named on the Notice== ===[http://canlii.ca/t/hs0ff TSL-85025-17 (Re), 2018 CanLII 42621 (ON LTB)]=== :2. The Land...")
 
(Blanked the page)
Tag: Blanking
 
(58 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Category:Landlord Tenant]]


==Landlord Not Correctly Named on the Notice==
===[http://canlii.ca/t/hs0ff TSL-85025-17 (Re), 2018 CanLII 42621 (ON LTB)]===
:2.      The Landlord requested to amend the application to correct the name of the corporation in the style of cause. The Tenants did not dispute that the Landlord was incorrectly named in the application and in the notice of termination but they argued that the incorrectly named landlord rendered the notice of termination void. <b>However, as I explained at the hearing, [https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/06r17#BK52 section 43 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006] the “Act”), which sets out <u>the essential elements of a notice of termination, does not specifically state that a landlord must be correctly named in a notice.</u> Therefore, I find that the landlord’s failure to name itself correctly in the notice does not render it defective and void.</b>
:3.      The Tenants also raised the recent amendment to section 48 of the Act, which prevents a corporation from filing a landlord’s own use application. However, that amendment came into effect on May 30, 2017, several months after the Landlord’s application was filed and it does not apply to this application. In the present case, the Landlord corporation owns the residential complex. It filed an application seeking vacant possession of the rental unit so the son of the sole owner of the corporation can move into the unit. I am satisfied that the individual owner, CB, is the directing mind of the corporation. As such, I am satisfied that CB meets the definition of “landlord” in the Act because he is also an owner of the rental unit. Accordingly, CB will be referred to as the Landlord in the remainder of this order.  This approach is consistent with the court’s decision in [http://canlii.ca/t/2d05l Slapsys (1406393 Ontario Inc.) v. Abrams, 2010 ONCA 676 (CanLII)].

Latest revision as of 17:40, 20 March 2020