Commercial vs Residential Tenancy Dispute: Gykan Enterprises Inc. v. Pourshian
Court upholds LTB decision classifying tenancy as residential despite commercial lease, dismissing landlord's appeal
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
Jul 2023
Order Date
Jul 6, 2023
Dispute Summary
Landlord appealed LTB decision that found the tenancy was residential. Landlord had locked Tenant out claiming the lease was commercial. Tenant applied to LTB to determine if Residential Tenancies Act applied and to address illegal lockout.
Determinations
- LTB had jurisdiction to determine if tenancy was residential
- Tenant's application was not an abuse of process
- LTB correctly applied relevant provisions of Residential Tenancies Act
- LTB's finding that tenancy was residential was well-founded in evidence
- No error of law in LTB's decision
Case Study
The court dismissed the landlord's appeal, finding no errors of law in the LTB's decision. The court affirmed that the LTB had jurisdiction to determine if the tenancy was residential, even after the landlord had locked out the tenant. The tenant's application was not an abuse of process. The LTB properly considered the evidence in determining the tenancy was residential despite the commercial lease.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlord argued that LTB lacked jurisdiction because tenancy was terminated before LTB application, that tenant's application was abuse of process, that evidence showed tenancy was commercial, and that LTB failed to balance rights and responsibilities of parties.
Actions
Landlord issued notice of termination for non-payment of rent and changed locks a few days later. Landlord required tenant to sign temporary access agreement to retrieve belongings.
Procedural Errors
Landlord illegally locked out tenant before LTB determination on nature of tenancy.
Aggravating Factors
Landlord illegally locked out tenant and changed locks before LTB determination on nature of tenancy.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued that the tenancy was residential and protected under the Residential Tenancies Act, despite the commercial lease and zoning.
Actions
Tenant brought application to LTB on the day he was locked out to determine if Residential Tenancies Act applied. Tenant also filed application alleging illegal lockout.
Decision Summary
The Divisional Court dismissed the landlord's appeal of the LTB decision that found the tenancy was residential. The court found no errors of law in the LTB's decision and affirmed that the LTB had jurisdiction to make the determination even after the landlord had locked out the tenant. The court ordered the landlord to pay $2,000 in costs to the tenant.
Adjudicator Details
Ontario Superior Court of Justice - Divisional Court
Total Orders
6
Landlord Favorable
50.0%
Tenant Favorable
50.0%
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.