Senger v. Harding Holdings Ltd. et al., 2015 SKQB 55

• Judge: Currie, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: February 19, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2015 SKQB 55;(2015), 470 Sask.R. 172 (QB)

Senger v. Harding Holdings (2015), 470 Sask.R. 172 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Sask.R. TBEd. MR.031

In The Matter Of Sections 44 and 49 of The Residential Tenancies Act, 2006

Debbie Senger (appellant) v. Harding Holdings Ltd. (respondent) and The Office of Residential Tenancies (respondent)

(2015 QBG No. 24; 2015 SKQB 55)

Indexed As: Senger v. Harding Holdings Ltd. et al.

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Currie, J.

February 19, 2015.

Summary:

A tenant (Senger) applied to the Office of Residential Tenancies for an award of damages against her landlord, claiming that it had breached her right to quiet enjoyment of her rental unit when another tenant (Paquette) entered Senger's rental unit without permission. The Hearing Officer found that the landlord was not responsible for Paquette's actions because Paquette was not acting as an agent of the landlord. The Hearing Officer found that it was unnecessary for him to determine whether Paquette actually entered the rental unit as alleged. Senger appealed.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the appeal and remitted the matter to the Hearing Officer so that he could make a determination as to whether Paquette did in fact enter Senger's rental unit without permission.

Landlord and Tenant - Topic 1393

The premises - Quiet enjoyment - Breach - Interference by third parties - A tenant (Senger) applied to the Office of Residential Tenancies for an award of damages against her landlord, claiming that it had breached her right to quiet enjoyment of her rental unit when another tenant (Paquette) entered Senger's rental unit without permission - The Hearing Officer found that the landlord was not responsible for Paquette's actions because Paquette was not acting as an agent of the landlord - The Hearing Officer found that it was unnecessary for him to determine whether Paquette actually entered the rental unit as alleged - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed Senger's appeal - Section 7(b) of the standard conditions which formed part of every residential tenancy agreement stated that a tenant's right to quiet enjoyment of a rental unit included "freedom from unreasonable disturbance by the landlord or other tenants" - The landlord was responsible for providing this freedom - Otherwise, there would be no point in inserting the expression in a contract between the tenant and the landlord - The landlord therefore had to take reasonable measures to stop a tenant from interfering with another tenant's quiet enjoyment - The court remitted the matter back to the Hearing Officer so that he could make a determination as to whether Paquette did in fact enter Senger's rental unit without permission.

Landlord and Tenant - Topic 2281

The lease - Statutory terms - General - [See Landlord and Tenant - Topic 1393 ].

Landlord and Tenant - Topic 2761

The lease - Breach by landlord - What constitutes - [See Landlord and Tenant - Topic 1393 ].

Cases Noticed:

Waterman v. Universal Realty Ltd. et al. (2009), 347 Sask.R. 29; 2009 SKQB 462, refd to. [para. 5].

Counsel:

Amanda K. Dodge, for Debbie Senger;

Jesse Harding, for Harding Holdings Ltd.

This appeal was heard before Currie, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, who delivered the following judgment on February 19, 2015.