Evicting a Superintendent: Difference between revisions
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Superintendent Premises (LTB)]] | [[Category:Superintendent Premises (LTB)]] | ||
==Langer Properties v. Langer, [1998] O.J. No. 515== | ==Langer Properties v. Langer, [1998] O.J. No. 515<ref name="Langer1998"/>== | ||
3. The situation is entirely different from that in the Rondinelli case that the appellant relies upon. There, the landlord made an arrangement with a tenant who had occupied premises other than as a caretaker whereby that tenant would perform caretaking operations upon the property in return for a reduction in rent. That tenant had the security of the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act at the time that the arrangement was made with him on an ad hoc basis by the landlord | 3. The situation is entirely different from that in the Rondinelli case that the appellant relies upon. There, the landlord made an arrangement with a tenant who had occupied premises other than as a caretaker whereby that tenant would perform caretaking operations upon the property in return for a reduction in rent. That tenant had the security of the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act at the time that the arrangement was made with him on an ad hoc basis by the landlord | ||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
<ref name="Langer1998">Langer Properties v. Langer, [1998] O.J. No. 515, <https://caselaw.ninja/img_auth.php/d/d4/Langer_Properties_v_Langer_1998.pdf>, retrieved on 2020-06-22</ref> | <ref name="Langer1998">Langer Properties v. Langer, [1998] O.J. No. 515, <https://caselaw.ninja/img_auth.php/d/d4/Langer_Properties_v_Langer_1998.pdf>, retrieved on 2020-06-22</ref> | ||
==Maystar Holdings v. Isufaj, [2000] O.R.H.T.D. No. 127== | |||
<ref name="Maystar2000"> Maystar Holdings v. Isufaj, [2000] O.R.H.T.D. No. 127, <https://caselaw.ninja/img_auth.php/8/83/Maystar_Holdings_v_Isufaj_2000_ORHTD.pdf>, retrieved on 2020-06-22</ref> | |||
==References== | ==References== |
Revision as of 22:18, 22 June 2020
Langer Properties v. Langer, [1998] O.J. No. 515[1]
3. The situation is entirely different from that in the Rondinelli case that the appellant relies upon. There, the landlord made an arrangement with a tenant who had occupied premises other than as a caretaker whereby that tenant would perform caretaking operations upon the property in return for a reduction in rent. That tenant had the security of the provisions of the Landlord and Tenant Act at the time that the arrangement was made with him on an ad hoc basis by the landlord
4 In this case, as I have mentioned, the appellant was a manager of other premises at the time he took occupancy at 66 Lowther and became a manager of 66 Lowther in the ordinary sense of the word as soon as the other apartments were occupied. In our judgment, however, he was a manager from the outset in that he was taking care of a property that was being renovated to accommodate residential occupancy.
5 In these circumstances, in our opinion, the landlord was entitled to terminate the tenancy agreement, such as it was, with David Langer under the provisions of section 115(1) of the Landlord and Tenant Act. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
Maystar Holdings v. Isufaj, [2000] O.R.H.T.D. No. 127
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Langer Properties v. Langer, [1998] O.J. No. 515, <https://caselaw.ninja/img_auth.php/d/d4/Langer_Properties_v_Langer_1998.pdf>, retrieved on 2020-06-22
- ↑ Maystar Holdings v. Isufaj, [2000] O.R.H.T.D. No. 127, <https://caselaw.ninja/img_auth.php/8/83/Maystar_Holdings_v_Isufaj_2000_ORHTD.pdf>, retrieved on 2020-06-22