Bhasin v. Gill: Court Overturns LTB Decision on N11 Agreement
Court overturns LTB eviction order, emphasizing need to consider verbal agreements in N11 termination cases
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: August 16, 2024
Case Summary
Decision in favor of
tenant
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Oct 2019
Order Date
Oct 31, 2019
Dispute Summary
Tenants appealed a Landlord and Tenant Board order terminating their tenancy based on an N11 agreement. Tenants argued there was a verbal side agreement allowing them to stay until the house was sold, which the Board did not properly consider.
Determinations
- Board erred in law by not properly considering alleged verbal side agreement
- Board's decision was not justified, transparent or intelligible
- Board failed to ascertain real substance of all transactions as required by s.202(1) of RTA
- Appeal allowed and case remitted back to Board for new hearing
Case Study
The court found that the Landlord and Tenant Board erred in law by not making factual findings about the alleged verbal side agreement or analyzing its legal consequences. The Board's decision was not justified, transparent or intelligible without explaining why the N11 agreement was binding despite any potential side agreement.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlords argue that the N11 agreement was binding and not subject to any verbal side agreement.
Actions
Landlords brought an application to terminate the tenancy to the Landlord and Tenant Board before the house was sold, despite the alleged verbal agreement to allow tenants to stay until closing.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenants argue that the N11 agreement was subject to a verbal side agreement allowing them to stay in the house until it was sold, even if that was after the July 31, 2017 termination date in the N11.
Actions
Tenants claim they signed the N11 agreement based on promises made in a verbal side agreement that was not reduced to writing because they were told by Landlord Parmjit Gill that it was not necessary as he was a man of his word.
Decision Summary
The Superior Court of Justice allowed the tenants' appeal of the Landlord and Tenant Board's decision terminating their tenancy. The court found the Board erred in law by not properly considering the alleged verbal side agreement or explaining why the N11 agreement was binding despite it. The case was remitted back to the Board for a new hearing before a different Member.
Adjudicator Details
Superior Court of Justice
Total Orders
1
Landlord Favorable
0.0%
Tenant Favorable
100.0%
Mutual Agreement
0.0%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
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.