2

As I understand it based on my reading of the Residential Tenancies Act

1. At the end of a lease Landlord and Tenant automatically enter into a month-to-month agreement unless

a. The landlord has reason to evict

b. The landlord would like to rent to family

c. The landlord would like to sell or complete major modifications to the house

d. The landlord and tenant enter into a new lease

2. Part V subsection 4 reads: " An agreement between a landlord and tenant to terminate a tenancy is void if it is entered into, at the time the tenancy agreement is entered into; or as a condition of entering into the tenancy agreement. 2006, c. 17, s. 37 (5)."

3. Then suppose a contract was signed with the following move out clause: "All tenants must agree to be fully moved out of the Property by the date given in this Lease Agreement and will not have ownership rights to any items left behind after that date"

I assume that the wording of the clause in (3) is acting as a termination of tenancy so based off of (2) it should be void. Then, at the end of Lease period based on (1) the rentor and landlord would enter into a month-to-month contract.

4. During the month-to-month period the rent should be limited in increase during the month-to-month period by Part VII.

Is my reading of this act correct?

Edit:

I'll try and make clear a couple of things.

  1. I understand that the tenancy can end if one of the above cases is true (a-d). 2a. The updated (2) seems to suggest to me that at the time the rental agreement was signed it cannot contain an agreement to terminate the tenancy. 2b. I assume that a "move-out date" clause in a lease agreement is the equivalent to a termination of tenancy agreement.
  2. So if at the end of the lease period, if a termination was in the original contract, which it shouldn't have been the landlord and rentor would enter into (1) month-to-month agreement unless a termination notice is submitted for one of the (a-d) reasons.
  3. It is completely (and likely) possible that there is a condition on this page that says you have to leave at the end of a fixed term lease but I can't find it. At least not without cause.
7
  • 1
    What contradiction are you referring to? 2 and 3 say the tenant may not give notice to terminate a fixed term lease early. The way a fixed term residential lease works in UK, is that if neither party has given the requisite notice to terminate at the end of the fixed term, it continues on a month-to-month basis until one party does give notice (or by mutual agreement). The fixed term does not end automatically. May 2, 2023 at 16:08
  • @WeatherVane, hi thank you. I'm very unfamiliar with legal language. My reading of it in context "A tenant’s notice to terminate a tenancy..." was that this is an instruction that is given to the Tenant by the landlord as the tenanat has been given notice to remove themselves from the tenancy. Perhaps the following condition is closer to what I was expecting: " An agreement between a landlord and tenant to terminate a tenancy is void if it is entered into, at the time the tenancy agreement is entered into; or as a condition of entering into the tenancy agreement. 2006, c. 17, s. 37 (5)."
    – akozi
    May 2, 2023 at 16:24
  • I took "A tenant's notice" to mean "The notice given by a tenant". May 2, 2023 at 16:33
  • I guess what I am trying to ask is if the original lease agreement has a stipulation that the tenant must move out by X date, is this enforceable? It seems to me the nature of the second quote (2006, c. 17, s. 37 (5)) is meant to imply that this type of language may not even be in the initial contract?
    – akozi
    May 2, 2023 at 19:22
  • From the link there obviously are fixed term leases. Why should their termination not be enforceable if the correct procedure to terminate is followed? You appear to be saying "I'm very unfamiliar with legal language. Is this there a fault in this law?" May 2, 2023 at 19:29

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .