Norg v Walsh - Landlord Wins Shared Accommodation Dispute
LTB rules Residential Tenancies Act does not apply to shared accommodation where landlord lives on-site and shares kitchen and bathroom with tenant
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: September 12, 2024
Case Summary
510 Geneva St, St. Catharines, ON L2N2H6
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Apr 2023
Order Date
Apr 27, 2023
Dispute Summary
The Landlord applied for an order to determine whether the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 applies to the tenancy agreement between the parties. The Landlord asserted the Act exempts the tenancy while the Tenant took the position that the Act applies.
Determinations
- Landlord lives in the home
- Tenant rented a bedroom on the main floor
- Landlord and Tenant shared kitchen and bathroom facilities
- Rental agreement specified shared accommodation
- Landlord used shared kitchen and bathroom facilities
Case Study
The Landlord and Tenant both signed a rental agreement that specified the Tenant was required to share the kitchen and bathroom facilities with the Landlord, who lived on-site. The Landlord provided evidence that she did in fact use the shared kitchen and bathroom facilities, even though she had her own private facilities. The Tenant's argument that the Landlord's access to private facilities meant there was no requirement to share was rejected. The Tribunal found that the intention of the parties, as evidenced by the rental agreement, was that the Tenant was required to share the kitchen and bathroom, and therefore the Residential Tenancies Act does not apply.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Actions
Landlord used the main floor kitchen and bathroom facilities from time to time, even though she had her own private facilities.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued that since the Landlord had her own private kitchen and bathroom, there was no requirement for the Tenant to share those facilities.
Actions
Tenant vacated the premises on March 22, 2023 and provided the Landlord with an N9 Notice to vacate effective April 15, 2023.
Decision Summary
The Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 does not apply to the tenancy agreement between the Landlord and Tenant. The Tenant was required to share the kitchen and bathroom facilities with the Landlord, who lived on-site, which exempts the tenancy from the Act.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
477
Landlord Favorable
90.6%
Tenant Favorable
4.4%
Mutual Agreement
5.0%
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.