Arrears of Rent & New Owners (LTB): Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
==Tam v Koebel, 2021 CanLII 76807 (ON LTB)<ref name="Koebel"/>== | ==Tam v Koebel, 2021 CanLII 76807 (ON LTB)<ref name="Koebel"/>== | ||
6. The Landlord and New Owner agreed that the Landlord ceased to be the owner of the subject unit on November 30, 2020, shortly after the issuance of the Order. Ownership transferred to the New Owner on December 1, 2020. The Tenant still occupies the unit. | |||
<b>7. I noted that if the matter proceeded only in the name of the Landlord without naming the New Owner, <u>the Landlord would not be entitled to seek enforcement of any eviction.</u></b> The Landlord’s representative concurred on this point and indicated that the Landlord did not now seek termination of the tenancy. The Landlord now sought only an order for payment of the rental arrears to November 30, 2020. | |||
8. The matter before me was a de novo hearing of the Landlord’s L1 application. When ownership of a property changes between the time the L1 application was filed and the hearing of the application, there can be a solid argument for amending the application to add the new owner and hearing the request for termination on the basis of non-payment of rent to the date of the hearing. | |||
Revision as of 18:05, 17 April 2024
| Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 © | |
|---|---|
| Date Retrieved: | 2024-05-05 |
| CLNP Page ID: | 2377 |
| Page Categories: | [Payment of Rent (LTB)] |
| Citation: | Arrears of Rent & New Owners (LTB), CLNP 2377, <https://rvt.link/c3>, retrieved on 2024-05-05 |
| Editor: | Sharvey |
| Last Updated: | 2024/04/17 |
Tam v Koebel, 2021 CanLII 76807 (ON LTB)[1]
6. The Landlord and New Owner agreed that the Landlord ceased to be the owner of the subject unit on November 30, 2020, shortly after the issuance of the Order. Ownership transferred to the New Owner on December 1, 2020. The Tenant still occupies the unit.
7. I noted that if the matter proceeded only in the name of the Landlord without naming the New Owner, the Landlord would not be entitled to seek enforcement of any eviction. The Landlord’s representative concurred on this point and indicated that the Landlord did not now seek termination of the tenancy. The Landlord now sought only an order for payment of the rental arrears to November 30, 2020.
8. The matter before me was a de novo hearing of the Landlord’s L1 application. When ownership of a property changes between the time the L1 application was filed and the hearing of the application, there can be a solid argument for amending the application to add the new owner and hearing the request for termination on the basis of non-payment of rent to the date of the hearing.
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Tam v Koebel, 2021 CanLII 76807 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/jhnb2>, retrieved on 2024-04-17
