OPENING AND CLOSING STATEMENT

SUBMITTED BY: - Fazal Mehmood

STUDENT ID NUMBER: - 301068431

SUBMITTED TO: - PROF. RANGILA SENGUPTA

DATE: - SEPTEMBER 30, 2019

SUBJECT: - ADVOCACY (PRLG 721)

OPENING STATEMENT FOR THE TENANT

Good morning, Madam Adjudicator. My name is Pragya, first initial P, and I am the licensed
paralegal representing Alice and Arlo Guthrie, the tenants in the case. This is a case where a
landlord, Jim Croce served notice of termination for personal use in bad faith. The tenants were
residing in 234 Sycamore Street, two–unit building owned by landlord. The tenants claim for
compensation for their increased rent and moving cost. The tenants had a one year written lease
with landlord. At the end of their lease period, the landlord served a notice of termination of their
tenancy so that his daughter, Cynthia Croce could move into the apartment. The tenants were
unable to find similar apartment at the same rent, but they were able to find another apartment in
the same neighbourhood at higher rent. The tenants incurred moving expenses as well. The
landlord’s daughter did not move into unit. The landlord instead re-rented the apartment at higher
rent than the tenants had been paying. Legal issue in this case is whether the landlord gave notice
of termination in bad faith, and is therefore liable to reimburse the tenant for increased rent and
moving cost. The tenants claim reimbursement of their increased rent for one year and their moving
expense.

CLOSING STATEMENT FOR THE TENANT

Madam Adjudicator, issue in this case is whether the landlord gave notice of termination in good
faith, and we submit that he did not.

Both the parties agree that the tenants had a one year written lease with landlord ending April
30,2016 at a monthly rent of $ 1,250.00, and that on March 1,2016 the landlord served the tenant
with a form N12, terminating tenancy as of April 30, 2016 on the basis that landlord’s daughter
would be moving into the unit. Both the parties also agree that the tenant moved out on March 31,
2016 after serving the landlord with form N9. The undisputed evidence of tenant is that they moved
into new apartment at a rent of $1350.00 and incurred moving cost of $750.00.

The landlord testified that he believed that his daughter would move back to Toronto after
graduating, at the time the notice of termination was given. However, the landlord’s daughter
testified that she told her parents that she would ‘probably’ move back. Both the parties agree that
the landlord daughter did not move back and landlord offered the apartment for rent at a monthly
rent of $1,375.00

The issue in this case is whether the landlord gave notice of termination in good faith, and we
submit that he did not on the basis of the evidence presented.

The area of law involved is residential tenancy law and in particular Residential Tenancy Act,
2006, SO 2006, chapter 17. Section 48 (1) (c) provide as follows:
48(1) A landlord may, by notice terminates a tenancy if landlord in good faith requires the
possession of unit for the purpose of residential unit by ,….(c) a child or parent of the landlord or
the landlord’s spouse.

If you conclude that notice was given in bad faith, Section 57of the Act apply under which a former
tenant may apply to the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) if notice under section 48 was given in
bad faith, the former tenant vacated the unit as a result of notice and no person referred to in section
48 occupied the unit within reasonable time.

In such a case landlord and tenant board may under section 57(3) order landlord to pay
compensation to tenant for (a)all or any portion of increased rent that former tenant incurred or
will incur for period of one year after vacating he premises,(b) moving and storage expense.

Further, Interpretation Guideline G12 of Landlord and Tenant Board, Eviction for Personal Use,
deals with interpretation of “requirement of good faith” in section 48, it states that the issue that
arise is whether the landlord or family member had real intention to reside in the rental unit. Under
the heading ‘the landlord requires the unit – test to be applied’ it provides that the burden of proof
is on landlord. It is relevant to landlord’s good faith intention to occupy the unit to determine the
likelihood that intended person will move.

Based on the evidence of the landlord’s daughter, it was not certain that she would be moving back
into the unit at the time landlord served notice of termination. We therefore submit that landlord
had not satisfied the burden of proof that he acted in good faith.

We therefore submit that the landlord should be ordered to pay the tenants increased rent of
$1,200.00 and there moving expense of $750.00 and thereby total of $1,950.00.