Densmore v. Lidstone

Densmore v. Lidstone

The court held it lacked jurisdiction to decide issues not raised before the Residential Tenancies Officer or in the notice of appeal; on the merits the tenants were liable for the water leakage because they failed to prevent foreseeable overflow; because matching flooring was discontinued an equitable allocation was required, and the landlord was awarded 50% of the full floor replacement costs plus apportioned labour, other proven damages and service costs, less the damage deposit, resulting in an order for $470.14.

Citation
2008 NSSM 48
Parties
Appellant/landlord: Ken Densmore; Respondent/tenant: David Lidstone; Respondent/co Signer: Cindy Lidstone; Respondent/co Signer: Larry Gaudet; Respondent/tenant: Christine Campbell; Respondent/co Signer: Donald Campbell; Respondent/tenant: Stephen Gauthier
Court
Nova Scotia Small Claims Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Residential Tenancies Appeal (small Claims Court) / Hearing and Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; Respondents ordered to pay Appellant $470.14
Legal Topics
Damage Allocation, Remoteness of Damages, Repair and Replacement, Deposit Deduction, Procedural Fairness, Evidence and Credibility
Source Language
English
Residential Tenancies Landlord and Tenant Contract Law Small Claims Court Procedure Damage Allocation Remoteness of Damages Repair and Replacement Deposit Deduction +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ken Densmore

Appellant/landlord

David Lidstone

Respondent/tenant

Cindy Lidstone

Respondent/co Signer

Larry Gaudet

Respondent/co Signer

Christine Campbell

Respondent/tenant

Donald Campbell

Respondent/co Signer

Stephen Gauthier

Respondent/tenant

Procedural Posture

Residential Tenancies Appeal (small Claims Court) / Hearing and Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Small Claims Court may adjudicate issues not raised before the Residential Tenancies Officer or in the notice of appeal
  2. 2 Whether adjudicating newly raised damages would breach natural justice
  3. 3 Whether tenants are liable for water damage caused by overflow of a portable washing machine

Ratio Decidendi

The court held it lacked jurisdiction to decide issues not raised before the Residential Tenancies Officer or in the notice of appeal; on the merits the tenants were liable for the water leakage because they failed to prevent foreseeable overflow; because matching flooring was discontinued an equitable allocation was required, and the landlord was awarded 50% of the full floor replacement costs plus apportioned labour, other proven damages and service costs, less the damage deposit, resulting in an order for $470.14.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; Respondents ordered to pay Appellant $470.14

Orders

  • Respondents pay Appellant the sum of $470.14