Notice of Entry - Re: COVID-19

Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 ©
Date Retrieved:	2024-11-23
CLNP Page ID:	1831
Page Categories:	[Interference of Reasonable Enjoyment (LTB)]
Citation:	Notice of Entry - Re: COVID-19, CLNP 1831, <5G>, retrieved on 2024-11-23
Editor:	Sharvey
Last Updated:	2021/12/17

Need Legal Help?
Call (888) 655-1076

Join our ranks and become a Ninja Initiate today

Lawrence v Woolstencroft, 2021 CanLII 88400 (ON LTB)

26. The Tenant requested an abatement of rent of $200.00. In support of this claim, the Tenant noted that this entry occurred nearing the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic and that the Landlord and her companion should not have entered the Tenant’s rental unit without wearing appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (‘PPE’). Although the Tenant admitted that under normal circumstances the Landlord’s behaviour would not have been a big deal, the Tenant argued that the requested abatement of rent was appropriate because if the risk of a COVID-19 infection materialized the Tenant would have been required to take at least 1-day off of work.

27. In my view, the Tenant’s claim for an abatement of $200.00 is excessive given the minor breach of section 27 of the Act. Although the Landlord did breach the Tenant’s privacy the impact on the Tenant was minimal. The risk of COVID-19 infection did not materialize and the Tenant did not provide any other evidence about the impact of the Landlord’s entry. In the circumstances, I find that the Tenant is entitled to an abatement of rent of $50.00.

Abir v Sobti, 2021 CanLII 123833 (ON LTB)

34. The Tenant was very disturbed by the presence of at least half a dozen strangers in the house on January 1, 2021. His agitation is understandable. There was no legitimate reason for SS to violate province-wide COVID-19 restrictions in this way. Further, SS and AS ought to have known that this conduct would disturb the Tenant, after the Tenant sent AS the email of December 28, 2020. Whether AS was aware that SS was allowing several people into the house on January 1, 2021 is immaterial. As a Landlord, SS ought to have refrained from having visitors inside the house on January 1, 2021 and as Landlords, he and AS must be held accountable for this conduct.

35. Based on the above, I find that AS and SS substantially interfered with the Tenant’s reasonable enjoyment of the property on January 1, 2021.