Rarotonga, 2010

Simon's Megalomaniacal Legal Resources


ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | SPPA / Fairness (Administrative)

home / about / Democracy, Law and Duty / testimonials / Conditions of Use

Civil and Administrative
Litigation Opinions
for Self-Reppers


Landlord and Tenant (Commercial) - Helping Tenants and Small Businesses Act (HTSBA)

. Drop and Run Inc. v. 1909703 Ontario Inc. (Integral Health Group Inc.)

In Drop and Run Inc. v. 1909703 Ontario Inc. (Integral Health Group Inc.) (Ont CA, 2022) the Court of Appeal considered a commercial tenancy case under the COVID-related Helping Tenants and Small Businesses Act, 2020:
[3] The application judge found that the respondent did not agree to reduce the rent. She also found it was not necessary to determine whether the lockout would have been unlawful as of October 1, when the Helping Tenants and Small Businesses Act, 2020, S.O. 2020, c. 23 – Bill 204 (HTSBA) came into force and amended the Commercial Tenancies Act, R.S.O. 1990, c L.7 (“the Act”), because the appellant re-entered the premises on October 2.


[7] The appellant’s argument that it is entitled to damages under the Act for the lockout from September 7 to October 1 is misconceived. The appellant was not locked out during the non-enforcement period established by the HTSBA. That period commenced on October 1, 2020 pursuant to s. 79 of the Act.

[8] Landlords that locked out tenants between September 1 and September 30, 2020 were required to restore possession to the tenant (unless the tenant declined to accept possession) as soon as reasonably possible, failing which the landlord was liable to pay damages under s. 86(1) of the Act. In this case, the appellant regained possession pursuant to the injunction on October 2 – the day after the HTSBA came into force. The respondent is not liable for damages in these circumstances.


The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.

Last modified: 19-01-23
By: admin