Cando Prop. Mgt. v. Wilson, (1983) 1 O.A.C. 77 (DC)
|Judge:||Van Camp, O'Leary and Eberle, JJ.|
|Court:||Superior Court of Justice of Ontario|
|Case Date:||November 30, 1983|
|Citations:||(1983), 1 O.A.C. 77 (DC)|
Cando Prop. Mgt. v. Wilson (1983), 1 O.A.C. 77 (DC)
MLB headnote and full text
Cando Property Management v. Wilson
Indexed As: Cando Property Management v. Wilson
Ontario Divisional Court
Van Camp, O'Leary and Eberle, JJ.
November 30, 1983.
A landlord gave a notice of rent increase to the tenant, then purported to cancel the notice and issue a second notice. The Rent Review Commission held a hearing and approved the second rent increase. The tenant appealed.
The Ontario County Court, in a decision unreported in this series of reports, dismissed the appeal. The tenant appealed to the Divisional Court.
The Ontario Divisional Court allowed the appeal and held that the second notice of rent increase was invalid.
Landlord and Tenant - Topic 3946
Rent - Rent increases - Notice of increase - Effect of - The Ontario Divisional Court held that once a landlord gave a notice of rent increase, the tenant could give notice to terminate the tenancy under s. 61 of the Residential Tenancies Act, or could elect to stay and give a notice of dispute of the increase under s. 127 of the Act - The court held that upon failure to do either, the tenant was deemed by s. 61 to have accepted the amount of increase in the notice - See paragraphs 4 to 7.
Landlord and Tenant - Topic 3948
Rent - Rent increases - Statutory regulation - A tenant was deemed by s. 61 of the Residential Tenancies Act to have accepted the amount in a notice of rent increase, after she failed to give notice of termination or notice of dispute of the amount - The Ontario Divisional Court held that the landlord's cancellation of the notice and issue of a second notice of increase was ineffective as contrary to s. 124 of the Act (which prohibited more than one increase every 12 months) - See paragraph 9.
Landlord and Tenant - Topic 3950
Rent - Rent increases - Invalid notice - Effect of - A landlord gave a second notice of rent increase within 12 months of the last increase, which was prohibited by s. 124 of the Residential Tenancies Act - The Ontario Divisional Court held that the second notice was not only ineffective, it could not support a rent increase on any subsequent date, including one after the expiration of the 12 month period - See paragraph 14.
Landlord and Tenant - Topic 3986
Rent - Security deposit - Effect of rent increase - The tenant was required to pay an amount equal to the last month's rent as a security deposit, which she did - The Ontario Divisional Court held that when the monthly rent later increased, the tenant was required to increase the deposit, regardless that the landlord did not request the difference in amounts - See paragraphs 11 to 13.
Hickey v. Stalker et al.,  1 D.L.R. 440; 53 O.L.R. 414, refd to. [para. 8].
Residential Tenancies Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 452, sect. 61 [paras. 4 to 8]; sect. 124 [paras. 9, 14]; sect. 127 [paras. 4 to 6].
Kenneth Hale, for the appellant;
Stanley Pasternak, for the respondent.
This appeal was heard before Van Camp, O'Leary and Eberle, JJ., of the Ontario Divisional Court, on October 26 and 27, 1983. The decision of the court was delivered orally by Van Camp, J., and released on November 30, 1983.
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP