Landlord Wins Personal Use Case: Rezk v Muluka and Afande 2022
Landlord wins personal use eviction case in Nepean after tenants vacate
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 26, 2024
Case Summary
652 Kilbirnie Drive, Nepean, ON K2J0G8
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date
Sep 2021
Tenancy End Date
Nov 2021
Hearing Date
Dec 2021
Order Date
Feb 1, 2022
Dispute Summary
Landlord applied for an order to terminate the tenancy and evict the Tenants because the Landlord has entered into an agreement of purchase and sale of the rental unit and the purchaser requires possession of the rental unit for the purpose of residential occupation.
Determinations
- Tenants vacated rental unit on 2021-11-07
- Hearing on merits no longer required
- Application fee not ordered to be paid by Tenants
Case Study
The Landlord's application was initially dismissed because the N12 Notice of Termination was found to be invalid. The Landlord requested a review of the order, and the parties consented to the request for a review and the application was heard de novo. As the Tenants had vacated the rental unit on November 7, 2021, a hearing on the merits was no longer required. The Board declined to order the Tenants to pay the application fee, as there were no unusual circumstances that warranted such an order.
Arguments and Actions
Tenant
Actions
Tenants vacated the rental unit on 2021-11-07.
Decision Summary
The Landlord's application is dismissed. The Tenants had already vacated the rental unit prior to the hearing.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
534
Landlord Favorable
79.6%
Tenant Favorable
14.0%
Mutual Agreement
6.4%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Application Fee
$186
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.