Landlord's Second Attempt to Evict Tenants Fails Due to Res Judicata: Alipour v Dumalo, Afshin 2021
Landlord's second attempt to evict tenants for personal use fails due to res judicata
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 26, 2024
Case Summary
95 Goulding Avenue, North York, ON M2M1L3
Decision in favor of
tenant
Balance Owed to Landlord
$1,600
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date
Jan 2020
Hearing Date
Jul 2021
Order Date
Oct 8, 2021
Dispute Summary
Landlord applied to terminate the tenancy and evict the Tenants because the Landlord requires possession of the rental unit for the purpose of residential occupation. This was the Landlord's second attempt to evict the Tenants for the same reason, as the previous application was dismissed in 2019 due to lack of good faith.
Determinations
- The Board previously determined that the Landlord's application was not made in good faith
- The current application seeks eviction for the same reason as the previous application
- The decision in the previous application was final and not appealed
- The parties and the rental unit are the same in both applications
- The Board has discretion to apply the doctrine of res judicata, and has decided to do so in this case
Case Study
The Board found that the doctrine of res judicata applies, as the same question of whether the Landlord has a genuine intention to move into the rental unit for at least one year has already been decided in the previous application. The Board determined that the Landlord's application is not made in good faith, and therefore the current application is dismissed.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
The Landlord argued that the res judicata should not apply because the Tenants' issues with the Landlord's father/agent have changed, the N12 notice was issued more than a year after the previous hearing, the Landlord's circumstances including her place of residence have changed, and the maintenance issues that were a factor in the previous decision have been resolved.
Decision Summary
The Landlord's application is dismissed. The Board found that the doctrine of res judicata applies, as the same question of whether the Landlord has a genuine intention to move into the rental unit for at least one year has already been decided in the previous application. The Tenants are ordered to pay $1,600 to the Landlord, which represents the return of compensation paid to the Tenants.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
513
Landlord Favorable
92.2%
Tenant Favorable
4.3%
Mutual Agreement
3.5%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Other Owed Amount
$1,600
Compensation paid to Tenants
Total Owing
$1,600 (Owed to Landlord)
Source
Similar Cases
Click to switch between case outcomes
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Goklani v Cannata
Toronto tenants' maintenance dispute against landlord dismissed by LTB
Jeff v Ferguson
Woodstock landlords awarded $35,186 in rent arrears, tenants face eviction for non-payment.
Oxford Properties Group v Benjamin
Tenant ordered to pay $22,461.70 for flood damage with conditional tenancy preservation
Sufi Properties Ltd v Nieman
Tenants ordered to pay $16,866 in rent arrears to Former Landlord after complex dispute.