Legal Analysis: Case Study on Landlord-Tenant Disputes & Resolution

This case study examines property law principles within the context of landlord-tenant relationships. It analyzes two scenarios: one involving Melissa and David, where unpaid rent is the central issue, and another involving Mr. Bob and Mr. Justin, focusing on responsibility for property damage and wear. The analysis identifies relevant rights and obligations under the Residential Tenancy Act (RTA), including the landlord's right to collect rent, enter the property, and evict tenants, as well as the tenant's obligation to pay rent and maintain the property. The study applies legal rules from the RTA and relevant court cases to determine the likely outcomes of disputes, such as whether a tenant is liable for carpet cleaning or rent arrears. The conclusion is based on the application of the law and previous case precedents, thus offering insight into the possible resolution of the presented scenarios. Desklib offers further assistance with similar assignments.

Running head: BUSINESS LAW 1
Business Law
[Author Name(s), First M. Last, Omit Titles and Degrees]
[Institutional Affiliation(s)]
Author Note

BUSINESS LAW 2
Abstract
Business law is one of the major divisions of the law which governs the deals between people
and commercial matters. The extent of this law is broad in that it is somehow related to property
law. In property law, business law governs the relationship between the property owners and
their tenants. For instance, in a tenancy agreement, business law ensures that both parties, the
landlord, and tenant fulfill their obligation. Aside from obligations, the law ensures that each
party obtain the benefits of the agreement in a fair manner. Where these obligations are not
honored either by the landlord or tenant, the law steps in to award compensation to the injured
party. Thus, business law attains its objective in ensuring that each of the parties has reached the
point it contemplated during and after the formation of the agreement. This paper aims to
elaborate this concept by looking at case scenarios of involving Melissa and David, another one
involving Mr. Bob and Mr. Justin.
Keywords: landlord, Tenant, Rights, Obligation, Tenancy

BUSINESS LAW 3
CASE 1: Melissa and Bob
Question 1.
These principles involved are those that a valid agreement must have an offer,
acceptance, supported by a valid consideration (Furmston & Tolhurst, 2010, p. 11). In the case,
Melissa is the offeror and David is the offeree. The house is the offer and $3600 per month is the
consideration. Once a contract is made, both parties are left with rights and obligations to fulfil
(Furmston & Tolhurst, 2010, p. 11). David is obliged to pay rent and Melisa is obliged to give the
house to David.
Question 2:
The Residential Tenancy Act allows Melissa a right to collect both rent and deposit, right
to enter the house, increase the rent, and a right to evict. David has the obligation to pay rent
maintain cleanliness, and make repairs of undue damages (Residential Tenancy Act, 2006).
Question 3:
Issue
Is Bob indebted to Melissa for amount that has not been paid for the rent, and which
amount is he required to pay?
Rule of law
Section 59 requires the landlord to provide a notice of termination of the tenancy (N4) in
case a tenant fails to pay rent. The landlord can later file for an eviction and recovery of arrears
with Landlord and Tenancy Board (RTA, 2006).
Application of the rule of law
On application, Melissa will need to give N4 to David and wait for the lapse of 14 day.
Melissa later file for an eviction with the Board if David does not pay. In (D’Amico v. Hitti,

BUSINESS LAW 4
2012). The board ordered the Tenant to pay, and this order was enforced by the court when it
ordered for an eviction for failure to comply. Again, in the case of (Cracknell v. Jeffrey, 2001),
the court ordered the tenant to pay all the arrears, cost of utilities, and interests from utilities.
Conclusion
David would be ordered to pay rent or be evicted.
CASE 2: Mr. Bob and Mr. Justin
Question 4:
Under the RTA, the landlord has a right to choose tenant, collect rents and deposits, enter
the house, and evict tenant (RTA, 2006). The landlord’s obligations are to repair the units,
maintenance of common areas, re services, and providing proper documentation. Tenants has
obligations to timely pay rents, clean units, repairing undue damages. Tenants have rights to
safety, tenant insurance, accessing vital Services, protection from unlawful eviction.
Question 5.
Issue
Who has the responsibility for standard tear and wear, and is carpet cleaning part of tear
and wear?
Rule of law
Section 33 of RTA requires that tenants to maintain standard and ordinary cleanliness of
the premises (RTA, 2006). The section also places responsibility for repairs of tenant is
responsible for undue damages caused by tenant’s or their agent’s negligent or willful conducts.
On the other hand, section 20 imposes the responsibility of repairs to the landowners (RTA,
2006). In the case of (Kamoo v. Brampton Caledon Housing Corp, 2005), the court settled that
reasonable tear and wear are not under the responsibilities of the tenant.

BUSINESS LAW 5
Application
On application, the court considers reasonable tear and wear as responsibilities of the
landlord (Kamoo v. Brampton Caledon Housing Corp, 2005). In Bob’s and Justin’s dispute, the
carpet had already been used for 2 years before Justin use enters the house. Again, as houseplants
can dry by their own, their failure of their survival cannot be attributed to tenant’s undue
damages as required by Section 33.
Conclusion
Justin would not be liable for $1324.21

BUSINESS LAW 6
References
Furmston, M., & Tolhurst, G. J. (2010). Contract Formation: Law and Practice. OUP Oxford.
Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 17
Cracknell v. Jeffrey, 2001 ABPC 11
D’Amico v. Hitti 2012 ONSC 4467 (CanLII), 2012 ONSC 4467 (Div. Ct.)
Kamoo v. Brampton Caledon Housing Corp (2005) O.J. No 3911