Young v. Saanich Police Department, 2003 BCSC 926 (CanLII).

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Young v. Saanich Police Department, et al Page 18 in the Supreme Court of British Columbia. That matter has not yet been set down for hearing. The Notice of Eviction [38] On April 18, 2002, Ms. Jaarsma sent a final warning letter to the petitioners, alleging that the odour of marihuana emanating from their suite amounted to a breach of Article 13 of their tenancy agreement in that it disturbed, 2003 BCSC 926 (CanLII) harassed or annoyed other tenants. Ms. Jaarsma requested that the petitioners take immediate action to remedy this breach or face eviction. [39] On July 10, 2002, Ms. Joy delivered a Notice to Terminate Tenancy (the "Notice") to the petitioners. The reasons given for the termination read as follows: The tenants have failed to rectify a breach of Article #13 (Conduct) of the Tenancy Agreement after having received written notice to do so. Final warning letter was given on April 18, 2002. ... The conduct of the tenants is such that the enjoyment of other occupants in the residential property is unreasonably disturbed. ... Other residents and their guests continue to have their enjoyment disturbed due to the noxious smell of marijuana coming from Mr. and Mrs. Young's suite into the common hallway, and the suites and patio areas of the other residents. Tenants are complaining of the overwhelming odor and their concerns regarding health issues, impact on children, impact on visitors to the building, child
Young v. Saanich Police Department, et al Page 19 custody issues, quality of life, security issues, etc. The landlord has concerns regarding the possible impact on the building due to marijuana cultivation in Mr. and Mrs. Young's suite. Mr. and Mrs. Young have refused to implement a remedy or advise how they intend to minimize the impact of growing marihuana in their suite. The Landlord has suffered damages due to another tenant vacating the premises due to these concerns. Two other tenants have transferred to locations operated by the Landlord in order to escape from the concerns listed above. The landlord has two other tenants currently waiting for transfers. 2003 BCSC 926 (CanLII) On July 16, 2002, the petitioners filed an application for arbitration under the RTA requesting an order setting aside the Notice. The Hearing Before Arbitrator Gilbert [40] The hearing before Arbitrator Gilbert took place on July 31, 2002, August 15, 2002 and August 26, 2002. Mr. and Mrs. Young were present on July 31, 2002 only. Their counsel, Mr. Duhaime, was present throughout. Appearing for the CRHC were Ms. Joy, Ms. Jaarsma and counsel for the CRHC, Mr. Borzoni. During the course of the hearing, Arbitrator Gilbert admitted evidence in the form of sworn viva voce testimony, affidavits and unsworn letters. [41] Arbitrator Gilbert issued written reasons on August 29, 2002, in which he dismissed the petitioners' application to
Page 1 and 2: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COL
Page 3 and 4: Young v. Saanich Police Department,
Page 17: Young v. Saanich Police Department,
Page 69 and 70:
Young v. Saanich Police Department,
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
show all

Young v. Saanich Police Department, 2003 BCSC 926 (CanLII).

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?