Takhar v Tariq

Tenant wins · Brampton · 2025-10-23

Adjudicator

Inderdeep Padda

Dispute

Substantial Interference, Utilities

Notice

Substantial interference (N5)

Landlord

H.T., G.T.

Tenant

M.T., A.T., M.T., S.R., A.A., H.T., A.Q., S.T., A.T.

Landlord rep

Ravinder Bassi

What happened

The Landlords applied to terminate the tenancy and evict the Tenants due to substantial interference. The Landlords served a non-voidable second N5 notice but failed to serve a necessary first voidable N5 notice beforehand. Additionally, the Tenants had already vacated the rental unit nearly two years prior to the hearing. The Landlords also attempted to amend the application to include over $7,000 in utility costs long after the Tenants moved out.

The ruling

The application is dismissed. The Landlords cannot terminate the tenancy based on an invalid second N5 notice, and the Tenants have already vacated. The request to add a claim for utility costs was rejected because the Landlords did not follow proper service rules and waited too long to file the amendment.