3230813 Nova Scotia Limited (Sterling Properties) v. Venna Accessories Limited

3230813 Nova Scotia Limited (Sterling Properties) v. Venna Accessories Limited

Adjudicator held that most CAM allocations by Claimant were permissible under the lease and allowed the furnace/boiler expense as an operating expense under Article 6.01(k), but reduced amounts for a capital stair replacement and excessive allocations for landscaping and Turner Drake assessment fees; Claimant failed to prove ownership of alleged removed fixtures so recovery for those items was denied; Defendant held liable for a broken window and clogged toilet; prejudgment interest awarded at Small Claims Court rate (4% p.a.) from vacancy to hearing; net monetary awards and credits produced a judgment for the Claimant; each party to bear their own costs.

Citation
2018 NSSM 85
Parties
Claimant/defendant by Counterclaim: 3230813 Nova Scotia Limited (Sterling Properties); Defendant/claimant by Counterclaim: Venna Accessories Limited
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Small Claims Court / Decision
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; counterclaim dismissed in substance; judgment awarded to Claimant
Legal Topics
Common Area Maintenance (cam), Additional Rent Calculation, Allocation of Operating Expenses Vs Capital Expenditures, Lease Interpretation, Fixtures Vs Tenant Property, Prejudgment Interest, Assessment Appeal Allocation
Source Language
English
Commercial Lease Contract Law Landlord and Tenant (commercial) Property Damage Tax/hst Real Property Assessment Common Area Maintenance (cam) Additional Rent Calculation +5 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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

3230813 Nova Scotia Limited (Sterling Properties)

Claimant/defendant by Counterclaim

Venna Accessories Limited

Defendant/claimant by Counterclaim

Procedural Posture

Small Claims Court / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether additional rent (CAM) was owing and correctly calculated
  2. 2 Whether specific expenditures (boiler, stairs, landscaping, accounting/assessment fees) qualify as operating expenses or capital and are apportionable
  3. 3 Whether tenant is liable for damage to the window and removal of alleged fixtures

Ratio Decidendi

Adjudicator held that most CAM allocations by Claimant were permissible under the lease and allowed the furnace/boiler expense as an operating expense under Article 6.01(k), but reduced amounts for a capital stair replacement and excessive allocations for landscaping and Turner Drake assessment fees; Claimant failed to prove ownership of alleged removed fixtures so recovery for those items was denied; Defendant held liable for a broken window and clogged toilet; prejudgment interest awarded at Small Claims Court rate (4% p.a.) from vacancy to hearing; net monetary awards and credits produced a judgment for the Claimant; each party to bear their own costs.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; counterclaim dismissed in substance; judgment awarded to Claimant

Orders

  • Judgment awarded to 3230813 Nova Scotia Limited in favour of monetary recovery after credits and interest
  • Judgment amount ordered: $6788.43 payable to Claimant