HORLICK v ELMOLLA

Landlord wins · Oakville · 2025-09-03

Adjudicator

Panagiotis Peter Roupas

Dispute

Personal Use

Notice

Personal use (N12)

Amount

<$5K

Landlord

E.H.

Tenant

M.E., R.M.

Landlord rep

David Ciobotaru

What happened

The Landlord applied to terminate the tenancy so her son could occupy the unit. The Tenants challenged the application, alleging bad faith, claiming the Landlord intended to sell the property and that the notice was retaliatory. The Landlord's son testified he needed the unit for privacy and professional reasons. The Board found the Landlord's son genuinely intended to occupy the unit but granted a significant postponement of the eviction to allow the Tenants more time to find housing due to their children's needs and current market conditions.

The ruling

The tenancy is terminated effective January 31, 2026. The Landlord is ordered to pay the Tenants $158.41 in remaining rent deposit interest. The request for the Tenants to pay the filing fee was denied because the application was filed before the original N12 termination date. The eviction is postponed by several months to account for the Tenants' family needs and financial circumstances.