The lessor asks the authorization of the Court in order to retake the apartment occupied by the tenant, in accordance with article 1963 of the Civil code of Quebec. The parties are bound by a lease of unspecified duration.

The lessor forwarded a notice to the tenant on March 24 informing him that he wished to repossess the apartment in order to live there from December 1 onwards. The tenant warned the lessor of his intention not to conform to it.

To support his request, the lessor pleads that he currently lives in a house far from the downtown area and that he heats with wood. Being stricken by Parkinson's disease, he wishes to occupy the apartment of the tenant located on the ground floor of the building and close to the services.

He produces medical expertise attesting of his multiple mobile, functional and sensory limitations.

The tenant opposes herself to the request pleading that she herself suffers from Osteo-arthritis and Fybromyalgy.

She says to have mentioned to the lessor at the time of the conclusion of the lease, nine years ago, that she wished to remain in the apartment for a long time and that the latter would have answered her that he intended to occupy the apartment above for his “old days”.

The lessor, by his testimony, corroborated by medical proof, convinced the Court of the cogency of his request. He really hopes to retake the apartment to live there.

The choice of this apartment located on the ground floor of the building explained itself by his multiple limitations. Moreover, the disease of the lessor was diagnosed in 2003. He could thus not know during the renting of the apartment to the tenant what the future held for him.

Consequently, the request is granted. However, article 1967 of the Civil code of Quebec states that:

« 1967. Where the court authorizes repossession or eviction, it may impose such conditions as it considers just and reasonable, including, in the case of repossession, payment to the lessee of an indemnity equivalent to his moving expenses.”

The judge concludes that:

“In the cases of eviction of the tenant for subdivision of the apartment or assignment change, the legislator envisaged a three-month allowance of rent and moving expenses and even a higher sum if the tenant justifies it. (Art. 1660.4 C.c). However, as regards eviction for resumption of possession, the legislator did not determine any precise allowance. He leaves  up to the Court the care to set the right and reasonable conditions, and in particular the moving allowance.

He must justify as much his refusal to grant or not to grant a moving allowance as well as right and reasonable conditions. He must seriously take into account the request of the tenant and as opposed to what some claim, refuse this request only exceptionally.

It is advisable here to recall that the resumption of possession is an exception to the right of  maintenance in the premises of the tenant and that it is caused by the lessor. It is consequently legitimate that the tenant sees himself compensated for the expenditure and the disadvantages which he underwent. This right is however marked out by the right of the lessor to have his goods and consequently, of his right to the resumption of possession. If the Court has discretion to determine the amount, it must take account of this right of the lessor and can certainly not condemn to damages-interest which result from a resumption of abusive possession. ”

The tenant has lived alone in the apartment for nine years. She has a major attachment to it.

The Court estimates that the granting of a sum of 1.500 $ will adequately compensate the tenant for the expenditure and inconveniences rising from the removal and the search for a new apartment.

DECISION

The Court authorizes the lessor to retake the apartment occupied by the tenant in order to live there from December 1 onwards, date on which the tenant will have to leave the premises. It also condemns the lessor to pay the tenant the sum of 1.500 $ at the latest on November 30, with interests at the statutory rate from December 1 onwards.

The lessor pays for the legal expenses of the request.