Royal Bank of Canada v Scott and all adult tenants
Tenant wins · Vanier · 2025-10-29
- Adjudicator
- Alicia Johnson
- Dispute
- Damage to Property, Substantial Interference
- Notice
- Substantial interference (N5)
- Landlord
- R.B.O.C.
- Tenant
- J.S., A.A.T.
- Landlord rep
- Jeffrey Kukla
What happened
The Landlord applied for an order to terminate the tenancy and evict the Tenant based on an N5 notice. The notice alleged that the Tenant or their guests had substantially interfered with the Landlord's reasonable enjoyment or caused willful/negligent damage. During the hearing, it was discovered that while the Landlord selected the reason for 'willful or negligent damage' on the N5 form, the details provided in the notice actually described issues related to substantial interference rather than physical damage. The Landlord argued that this was a clerical error and met the threshold of 'substantial compliance' under the Act. However, the Board found the notice confusing and invalid as it did not support the specific conduct alleged, leading to the dismissal of the application.
The ruling
The Landlord's application to terminate the tenancy is dismissed. The N5 notice used to support the application was found to be legally invalid because it listed 'damage' as the ground for termination while providing details that described 'substantial interference,' failing to provide the Tenant with clear and accurate information about the allegations.