Evicting a Superintendent: Difference between revisions

From Riverview Legal Group
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Access restrictions were established for this page. If you see this message, you have no access to this page.
Line 12: Line 12:




==Maystar Holdings v. Isufaj, [2000] O.R.H.T.D. No. 127==
==Maystar Holdings v. Isufaj, [2000] O.R.H.T.D. No. 127<ref name="Maystar2000"/>==


10 On July 4, 2000, Mr. Isufaj was injured while performing the duties of his employment, specifically suffering an injury to his back and to his foot. He immediately reported this injury to the on-site assistant manager, Detty Jurca. The Landlord did not report this injury to the Workplace Safety and Injury Board (WSIB), and Mrs. Jurca told Mr. Isufaj to seek medical attention, which he did. Mr. Isufaj received initial medical advice to rest for two days, but this was rejected by Mr. Kasmani, who insisted that he continue to perform his duties, failing which he would be out of a job. Mr. Isufaj, a recent immigrant to Canada, was not aware of the availability of a claim under workers' compensation legislation, and he continued to work for several weeks, notwithstanding his continuing injuries.


12 On August 21, 2000, Mr. Isufaj advised his superiors that he was unable to perform certain of his duties, specifically the taking out of the garbage. The Landlord terminated his employment verbally that very day, and this was confirmed by a letter of the same date, requesting that the rental unit be vacated
within two weeks.


<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>
<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 22:21, 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.

[1]


Maystar Holdings v. Isufaj, [2000] O.R.H.T.D. No. 127[2]

10 On July 4, 2000, Mr. Isufaj was injured while performing the duties of his employment, specifically suffering an injury to his back and to his foot. He immediately reported this injury to the on-site assistant manager, Detty Jurca. The Landlord did not report this injury to the Workplace Safety and Injury Board (WSIB), and Mrs. Jurca told Mr. Isufaj to seek medical attention, which he did. Mr. Isufaj received initial medical advice to rest for two days, but this was rejected by Mr. Kasmani, who insisted that he continue to perform his duties, failing which he would be out of a job. Mr. Isufaj, a recent immigrant to Canada, was not aware of the availability of a claim under workers' compensation legislation, and he continued to work for several weeks, notwithstanding his continuing injuries.

12 On August 21, 2000, Mr. Isufaj advised his superiors that he was unable to perform certain of his duties, specifically the taking out of the garbage. The Landlord terminated his employment verbally that very day, and this was confirmed by a letter of the same date, requesting that the rental unit be vacated within two weeks.

[2]

References

  1. 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
  2. 2.0 2.1 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