Fei v. Liu

Fei v. Liu

The lease was ambiguous and, under contra proferentem, must be interpreted against the drafting party (the Landlord), producing a month-to-month tenancy; the Tenant gave valid one-month notice and thus lawfully terminated the tenancy, so the appeal is dismissed and the Director's order to repay $341.15 is upheld.

Citation
2017 NSSM 44
Parties
Landlord (appellant): Lulu Chloe Fei; Tenant (respondent): Yang Liu
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court Appeal From Director of Residential Tenancies / Decision on Appeal (hearing Held August 15, 2017; Decision Rendered August 18, 2017)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Director of Residential Tenancies order upheld.
Legal Topics
Fixed Term Vs Month to Month Lease, Termination of Tenancy, Early Termination for Health Reasons, Contra Proferentem (interpretation Against the Draftsman), Medical Certificates as Evidence, Security Deposit Repayment
Source Language
English
Residential Tenancies Landlord–tenant Law Contract Law Administrative Law Fixed Term Vs Month to Month Lease Termination of Tenancy Early Termination for Health Reasons Contra Proferentem (interpretation Against the Draftsman) +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lulu Chloe Fei

Landlord (appellant)

Yang Liu

Tenant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court Appeal From Director of Residential Tenancies / Decision on Appeal (hearing Held August 15, 2017; Decision Rendered August 18, 2017)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the written lease was a fixed-term lease or a month-to-month tenancy
  2. 2 Whether the Tenant gave valid notice to terminate
  3. 3 Whether a physician's certificate justified early termination under s.10C of the Residential Tenancies Act

Ratio Decidendi

The lease was ambiguous and, under contra proferentem, must be interpreted against the drafting party (the Landlord), producing a month-to-month tenancy; the Tenant gave valid one-month notice and thus lawfully terminated the tenancy, so the appeal is dismissed and the Director's order to repay $341.15 is upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Director of Residential Tenancies order upheld.

Orders

  • Landlord ordered to repay the Tenant $341.15 (security deposit $310.00 plus application fee $31.15).