Curry v. Metropolitan Regional Housing Authority

Curry v. Metropolitan Regional Housing Authority

The Landlord failed to prove a post-mediation breach with the specificity and supporting documentation required by s.16(4); the Director erred by relying principally on an inadequately detailed DR3 without seeking additional information as permitted and required by s.16(6)(a), therefore the Director's order for vacant possession was set aside and the mediated settlement remains in effect.

Citation
2021 NSSM 22
Parties
Appellant/tenant: KERRI CURRY; Respondent/landlord: METROPOLITAN REGIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal of Director's Order Under the Residential Tenancies Act / Decision on Appeal (video Hearing)
Outcome
Order of the Director dated April 27, 2021 set aside; order for vacant possession set aside
Legal Topics
Mediated Settlement Enforcement, Breach of Mediated Settlement, Vacant Possession, Natural Justice (audi Alteram Partem)
Source Language
English
Residential Tenancies Administrative Law Landlord Tenant Law Mediation Procedural Fairness Mediated Settlement Enforcement Breach of Mediated Settlement Vacant Possession +1 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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KERRI CURRY

Appellant/tenant

METROPOLITAN REGIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY

Respondent/landlord

Procedural Posture

Appeal of Director's Order Under the Residential Tenancies Act / Decision on Appeal (video Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tenant breached the terms of the mediated settlement dated March 29, 2021
  2. 2 Whether the Director/Residential Tenancies Officer complied with statutory requirements in s.16 of the Residential Tenancies Act when ordering vacant possession
  3. 3 Whether the evidence (DR3 forms and statements) supplied by the Landlord met the specificity and supporting documentation requirements of s.16(4) and s.16(6)

Ratio Decidendi

The Landlord failed to prove a post-mediation breach with the specificity and supporting documentation required by s.16(4); the Director erred by relying principally on an inadequately detailed DR3 without seeking additional information as permitted and required by s.16(6)(a), therefore the Director's order for vacant possession was set aside and the mediated settlement remains in effect.

Court Disposition

Order of the Director dated April 27, 2021 set aside; order for vacant possession set aside

Orders

  • Order of the Director dated April 27, 2021 is hereby set aside
  • Order for vacant possession is set aside