|
RTA - Conversion to Use Other than Residential Premises. Boomer v. Arvane Farms Ltd. [good faith]
In Boomer v. Arvane Farms Ltd. (Ont Divisional Ct, 2025) the Divisional Court dismissed an RTA s.210 appeal by ten mobile home park tenants from eviction orders, here where the LL sought "to close the park and convert the land to non-residential use".
The LL used the s.50(1)(b) termination ground to "convert it to use for a purpose other than residential premises" provision, which has good faith and "all reasonable steps to obtain all necessary permits or other authority" requirements on application [under RTA 73(1)]:[7] Section 50(1)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c.17 ("RTA"), authorizes a landlord to evict their tenants if they require possession of the property to "convert it to use for a purpose other than residential premises".
[8] The first step in the process is to serve a Notice of Termination, called an "N13". The Landlord initially served the Tenants with N13 Notices, with a termination date of October 21, 2020. However, the municipal address on the notice was described as 495 Queensway. The property is described as both 493 and 495 Queensway, and the Tenants were situated on 493 Queensway.
[9] Out of an abundance of caution, on November 27, 2020, the Landlord served the Tenants with new N13 Notices, with the corrected address, and with a new termination date of November 30, 2021, giving the Tenants a further year's notice to find alternate accommodations.
[10] A notice becomes void 30 days after the termination date specified in the notice, unless the Landlord applies for an order terminating the tenancy and evicting the tenants: see RTA, s. 46. Therefore, the Landlord filed an application with the LTB to terminate the tenancy.
....
There was no error in finding good faith under s. 73(1)(a)
[35] Section 73(1) provides that the Board shall not make an order terminating the tenancy and evicting the tenant, under s. 50, unless it is satisfied that the landlord intends in good faith to carry out the activity on which the notice of termination was based, and the landlord has obtained all necessary permits, etc.
[36] The Tenants submit that the LTB applied the wrong test for good faith, under s. 73(1)(a), in that the good faith must be established at the time the notices were served, and not at the date of the hearing.
[37] The LTB refers to, and relies on, Fava v. Harrison, 2014 ONSC 3352 (Div. Ct.), which provides that the Board can consider the conduct and motives of the landlord to draw inferences as to whether the landlord desires, in good faith, to convert the land use. The original decision of the Board was restored in Fava, including the finding that the notice indicating that one of the landlords wished to occupy the property was not given in good faith.
[38] As set out in the Review Decision, the LTB Decision contains considerable detail concerning the activities of the Landlord since it acquired the property, including that the Landlord is not in the business of operating as a residential landlord. The Landlord wished to enter into a lease agreement well before the notice was served and at the time of purchase there was a single-family dwelling on the land and the Landlord obtained vacant possession, obtained the necessary permits, and then demolished the dwelling as part of the conversion. The decision also considered that prior N13 notices were served, and then withdrawn because they misidentified the land.
[39] At paragraph 95 of the LTB Decision, the Board concludes that there is no evidence before them that the Landlord has any intention other than to change the property to non-residential use and lease the property to Equipment Centre Simcoe 2.0 Ltd.
[40] It was open to the Member to conclude that the Landlord had always intended to close the park, and still intends to close the park.
[41] I find that the correct legal tests were applied and there was no error in law.
|
