Failure to Provide Particulars (N5): 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.
mNo edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:
==Ball v. Metro Capital Management Inc., Re, 2002 CarswellOnt 8691<ref name="Ball"/>==
==Ball v. Metro Capital Management Inc., Re, 2002 CarswellOnt 8691<ref name="Ball"/>==


[11] A notice by a landlord under section 64 of the Act, in addition to being a formal Notice to Terminate a Tenancy Early, is also a "notice to comply". Accordingly, as the tenant has the option "to comply", particulars of the allegations are essential to make the notice meaningful.
[12] Particulars should include dates and times of the alleged offensive conduct, together with a detailed description of the alleged conduct engaged in by the tenant.
[13] In the circumstances of this case, according to the materials, there were problems in the building relating to hot water. Where a landlord alleges a tenant of "harrassing its employees", it is particularly important that the notice clearly sets out sufficient details for a tenant to be put on notice that the particular acts complained of are alleged by the landlord to be "acts of harrassment" as compared to legitimate inquiries of a "rightfully assertive tenant".
[14] The Member of the Tribunal erred in failing to find that the Notice served on the Tenant was invalid for lacking in the required details.





Revision as of 16:18, 10 February 2022


Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 ©
Date Retrieved: 2024-09-28
CLNP Page ID: 1868
Page Categories: [Defective Notice (LTB)]
Citation: Failure to Provide Particulars (N5), CLNP 1868, <6K>, retrieved on 2024-09-28
Editor: Sharvey
Last Updated: 2022/02/10

Need Legal Help?
Call (888) 655-1076


Ball v. Metro Capital Management Inc., Re, 2002 CarswellOnt 8691[1]

[11] A notice by a landlord under section 64 of the Act, in addition to being a formal Notice to Terminate a Tenancy Early, is also a "notice to comply". Accordingly, as the tenant has the option "to comply", particulars of the allegations are essential to make the notice meaningful.

[12] Particulars should include dates and times of the alleged offensive conduct, together with a detailed description of the alleged conduct engaged in by the tenant.

[13] In the circumstances of this case, according to the materials, there were problems in the building relating to hot water. Where a landlord alleges a tenant of "harrassing its employees", it is particularly important that the notice clearly sets out sufficient details for a tenant to be put on notice that the particular acts complained of are alleged by the landlord to be "acts of harrassment" as compared to legitimate inquiries of a "rightfully assertive tenant".

[14] The Member of the Tribunal erred in failing to find that the Notice served on the Tenant was invalid for lacking in the required details.


[1]

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 Ball v. Metro Capital Management Inc., Re, 2002 CarswellOnt 8691, <https://caselaw.ninja/r/66>, retrieved on 2020-08-31