Breach of Contract (LTB)
Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 © | |
---|---|
Date Retrieved: | 2024-11-27 |
CLNP Page ID: | 2399 |
Page Categories: | |
Citation: | Breach of Contract (LTB), CLNP 2399, <>, retrieved on 2024-11-27 |
Editor: | Sharvey |
Last Updated: | 2024/08/03 |
Need Legal Help?
Call (888) 655-1076
Join our ranks and become a Ninja Initiate today
Residential Tenancies Act, 2006
22 A landlord shall not at any time during a tenant’s occupancy of a rental unit and before the day on which an order evicting the tenant is executed substantially interfere with the reasonable enjoyment of the rental unit or the residential complex in which it is located for all usual purposes by a tenant or members of his or her household. 2006, c. 17, s. 22.
23 A landlord shall not harass, obstruct, coerce, threaten or interfere with a tenant. 2006, c. 17, s. 23.
...
29 (1) A tenant or former tenant of a rental unit may apply to the Board for any of the following orders:
- ...
- 3. An order determining that the landlord, superintendent or agent of the landlord has substantially interfered with the reasonable enjoyment of the rental unit or residential complex for all usual purposes by the tenant or a member of his or her household.
- 4. An order determining that the landlord, superintendent or agent of the landlord has harassed, obstructed, coerced, threatened or interfered with the tenant during the tenant’s occupancy of the rental unit.
...
31 (1) If the Board determines that a landlord, a superintendent or an agent of a landlord has done one or more of the activities set out in paragraphs 2 to 6 of subsection 29 (1), the Board may,
- ...
- (f) make any other order that it considers appropriate. 2006, c. 17, s. 31 (1).
...
- (2) If in an application under any of paragraphs 2 to 6 of subsection 29 (1) it is determined that the tenant was induced by the conduct of the landlord, the superintendent or an agent of the landlord to vacate the rental unit, the Board may, in addition to the remedies set out in subsection (1), order that the landlord pay a specified sum to the tenant for,
- (a) all or any portion of any increased rent which the tenant has incurred or will incur for a one-year period after the tenant has left the rental unit; and
- (b) reasonable out-of-pocket moving, storage and other like expenses which the tenant has incurred or will incur. 2006, c. 17, s. 31 (2).
TET-89788-18 (Re), 2018 CanLII 113779 (ON LTB)
35. When a tenancy agreement includes a service like free laundry it is a breach of the Act for a landlord to simply cease to provide the service. Most tenants file a T3 application alleging discontinuance of a service or a facility. Sometimes the discontinuance is retaliatory and done deliberately to upset a tenant in which case it is a breach of s. 23 of the Act. But fundamentally, regardless of what type of application a tenant files, the failure to provide a service like laundry that is included in a tenancy agreement is a substantial interference with the rights of a tenant. It is a contractual right granted to the tenant and is treated like a breach of contract.
36. So I am satisfied that when the Landlord cut off laundry access to the Tenant he breached section 22 of the Act.
TET-92081-18 (Re), 2018 CanLII 113788 (ON LTB)[2]
38. In contract law, an unforeseeable unusual harm suffered by a plaintiff due to that person’s particular vulnerabilities will not be compensable in breach of contract unless the other party had prior knowledge of the person’s particular sensitivity. (See: Mustapha v. Culligan of Canada Ltd., [2008] 2 SCR 114, 2008 SCC 27 (CanLII).[3])
TST-62276-15-RV (Re), 2015 CanLII 75859 (ON LTB)[4]
21. The Landlord’s maintenance obligations and the irrelevance of fault have been referred to by the Divisional Court in Offredi v. 751768 Ontario Ltd 1994 CanLII 11006 (ON SCDC), [1994] O.J. No. 1204.[5] In that case the Divisional Court held: “The question of fault on the landlord’s part is not the issue... What the tenants claim is a breach of contract. The tenants were paying full rent for premises which the landlord was under an obligation… to keep in a good state of repair and fit for habitation. The landlord failed to do that. That is the basis for the claim for an abatement …”
TST-68104-15 (Re), 2016 CanLII 88326 (ON LTB)
68. It is well settled that the Board is limited to considering the relief requested in an application. While an order for damages for mental distress arising from breach of the contract between the parties herein (Taft v. Whitesands Apartments, [2009] O.J. No. 3198 (Div. Ct)) might have been appropriate had the original application specified such remedy and an amount claimed, applying the Divisional Court’s decision in Beauge, supra, I am unable to order what is not specifically requested in the application. For these reasons, an order will not issue in this regard.
References
- ↑ TET-89788-18 (Re), 2018 CanLII 113779 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/hwbfv>, retrieved on 2024-08-02
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 TET-92081-18 (Re), 2018 CanLII 113788 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/hwbgm>, retrieved on 2024-08-02
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Mustapha v. Culligan of Canada Ltd., 2008 SCC 27 (CanLII), [2008] 2 SCR 114, <https://canlii.ca/t/1wz6f>, retrieved on 2024-08-02
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 TST-62276-15-RV (Re), 2015 CanLII 75859 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/gm5mj>, retrieved on 2024-08-02
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 Offredi v. 751768 Ontario Ltd., 1994 CanLII 11006 (ON SCDC), <https://canlii.ca/t/gct27>, retrieved on 2024-08-02
- ↑ TST-68104-15 (Re), 2016 CanLII 88326 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/gw52d>, retrieved on 2024-08-02