Digest: Mezzo v Thiessen, 2018 SKQB 243

• Date: September 18, 2019

Reported as: 2018 SKQB 243

Docket Number: QBG 963/18 JCS , QB18233

Court: Court of Queen's Bench

Date: 2019-09-18

Judges:

• Scherman

Subjects:

• Landlord and Tenant � Residential Lease � Termination � Fundamental Breach
• Contract Law � Breach

Digest: The applicants filed an originating application that sought to have a lease between them and the defendants declared at an end on the grounds of fundamental breach by the defendants. The defendants responded that the agreement was not one of lease but rather an agreement for sale (AFS) of the land in question and that there were no grounds to terminate the AFS nor the alleged lease. The applicants described that they agreed to the defendants moving on to a portion of a quarter section of their land and building a residence that could be moved. Construction began in spring 2017 and the defendants moved into the building in July and began paying $1,000 per month in September. The applicants claimed that the payments were rent and the defendants stated that they were purchase price installments. In January 2018, the parties signed a document entitled �residential lease agreement with option to purchase�. It was poorly drafted but described the applicants as the landlord and the defendants as the tenant and provided a lease term of two years in respect of 15 acres of the quarter section. A rent of $994 was to be paid monthly and if the tenant was not in default in the performance of any terms of the lease, the tenant would have an option to purchase the property for $23,856. The defendants admitted that they signed a document in January 2018 but argued that it was another document, which they expected to reflect an oral agreement they had with the applicants to purchase the property over time. They alleged that the applicants altered the document that they signed and put a different one into evidence. After January the relationship between the parties deteriorated. The applicants alleged that the defendants placed their horses on lands outside of the leased portion and took steps to keep the applicants from gaining access. They threatened the applicants when they came onto their own lands. One of the defendants assaulted one of the applicants when he was working on a building on his own property. In fact, that defendant had been charged with nine offences committed against the applicants between February and August of 2018.
HELD: The application was granted. The court...