Trespass Ruling: Montaque v. West 2024 - Landlord Wins Eviction Case
Court rules occupant a trespasser, orders eviction to allow property sale
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: August 16, 2024
Case Summary
677 Church St, Trent River, ON K0L2Z0
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Jan 2024
Order Date
Feb 1, 2024
Dispute Summary
Landlord applied for a declaration of trespass, an order requiring Tenant to leave the property, and damages exceeding $40,000. Landlord claims no landlord-tenant relationship existed, while Tenant claims to be a tenant under an alleged oral agreement. The property was listed for sale, and Tenant moved in without permission, interfering with the sale.
Determinations
- No landlord-tenant relationship existed
- Residential Tenancies Act does not apply
- Tenant has no lawful right or interest in the property
- Tenant is a trespasser
- Tenant must vacate the premises by February 3, 2024 at 4:00 pm
- Determination of damages adjourned
- Landlord entitled to costs on a substantial indemnity basis
Case Study
The court found that no landlord-tenant relationship existed between the parties. The Residential Tenancies Act does not apply to this case. Tenant was determined to be a trespasser with no lawful right or interest in the property. The court has jurisdiction to make a declaration of trespass and grant orders for possession.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlord argued that no landlord-tenant relationship existed, the Residential Tenancies Act did not apply, and Tenant was a trespasser.
Actions
Landlord listed the property for sale in June 2023 and only considered renting if it did not sell by the end of September. Landlord specifically rejected renting to Tenant under any circumstances after her actions on September 14, 2023.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued that she had an oral agreement to lease the property and that the Residential Tenancies Act applied to the situation.
Actions
Tenant moved into the property on September 14, 2023, without permission and refused to vacate when requested. Tenant claimed to have an oral agreement with Landlord, which the court found to be false.
Aggravating Factors
Tenant moved into the property without permission, refused to vacate when requested, lied to police to secure residency, and interfered with the sale of the property.
Decision Summary
The court ruled that Tenant is a trespasser and must vacate the property by February 3, 2024 at 4:00 pm. No landlord-tenant relationship existed, and the Residential Tenancies Act does not apply. Landlord is entitled to costs on a substantial indemnity basis. Determination of damages is adjourned to a future hearing.
Adjudicator Details
Superior Court of Justice
Total Orders
1
Landlord Favorable
100.0%
Tenant Favorable
0.0%
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.