The lessee seeks:

• review of the lessor's decision that she is ineligible for subsidized housing through the RSP

Review the lessor's decision that declares the lessee ineligible to receive subsidized dwelling through the RSP.

The lessor is ordered to assess the allocation of a subsidy to the lessee through the RSP.

The lessor did not inform the lessee of the grounds for its decision to declare her ineligible for subsidized housing through the RSP.

The lessor did not inform the lessee that she could apply to the Régie du logement for a review of this decision.

This is not a case of relocation within the meaning of the By-law respecting the allocation of dwellings in low rental housing.

The mere fact of already being a lessee of a dwelling in low rental housing is not a reason for ineligibility for the allocation of another dwelling in low rental housing.

Ferland c. Office municipal d’habitation de Québec* (December 20, 2018)

* Discontinuance of appeal

The lessee seeks:

• review of the lessor's decision to transfer him and relocate him to another building and dwelling unit

The lessor's decision is upheld.

The lessee is eligible for the proposed dwelling – relocation is justified.

The composition of the household allows the lessee to occupy a dwelling with 2 bedrooms, and not 3 as in his current dwelling.

The lessee, who is over 60 years of age, must be transferred to a building suitable for his age bracket.

The lessee may not claim to have an acquired right to a dwelling equipped with:

• an inlet for his washing machine and dryer
• an indoor parking space

The lessee's refusal to comply with a relocation notice is a serious prejudice due to the long waiting lists managed by the lessor.

Khoury c. Office municipal d’habitation de Montréal secteur Nord-Ouest (November 22, 2018)

The lessee applies for:

• the review of the lessor’s decision

The lessor’s decision is upheld.

It is up to the lessor to demonstrate that the striking from the eligibility list is compliant with the conditions set out in the by-laws.

The preferences expressed by the lessee with respect to the floor of the dwelling are not among the options justifying a refusal to rent or take possession of a dwelling under the By-law respecting the allocation of dwellings in low rental housing.

The choices of the lessee that can justify a refusal to rent or take possession of a dwelling are limited to the location of the dwelling in the city or municipality in question.

Lafrenière c. Office municipal d'habitation de Sherbrooke (February 21, 2019)

The lessor seeks leave to appeal a decision of the Régie du logement reviewing its decision to strike the lessee’s name off the list of persons eligible for low-income housing for one year.

The leave is not granted.

The lessee refused a dwelling offered by the lessor, which is located near a shelter for persons in difficulty.

Due to his recent history of drug addiction, the lessee believes that he would be more susceptible to drug use if he were to live near this facility and he wishes to remain sober.

The Régie du logement concluded that the evidence showed the seriousness of the lessee’s particular personal situation.

The lessor must provide reasons for its decision to strike the lessee’s name off the list of eligible persons.

Office d’habitation de l’Outaouais c. Savard (December 19, 2019)

The lessee applies for:

• the review of the lessor’s decision to strike the lessee’s name off the list of persons eligible for low-income housing for one year due to her refusal to be transferred to a dwelling offered by the lessor

The Tribunal reviews the lessor’s decision.

The lessor is ordered to re-enter the lessee’s name on the list of eligible persons.

When the lessee was informed that the lessor no longer accepted the presence of dogs, she refused the subsidized private housing.

The lessee cannot benefit from the exemption under s. 52(3) of the By-law respecting the allocation of dwellings in low rental housing because the medical note she produced does not establish that the absence of dogs in the dwelling offered to her would result in significant harm to her psychological state.

However, from the outset, the lessee informed the lessor that she owned dogs, and the lessor took this into account.

Since the lessor’s actions misled the lessee, she was entitled to refuse the dwelling. In addition, the lessor acted in bad faith by striking the lessee’s name off the list of eligible persons.

Hardy c. Office d'habitation de la Matanie (August 26, 2020)

The lessee applies for:

• resiliation of the lease
• damages

The lease is resiliated by the lessor’s fault retroactively to June 1, 2020, the date on which the assignment of the lease would have taken effect, had it not been for the lessor’s intervention to prevent it.

A credit report revealed that the person to whom the lessee wanted to assign the lease had good credit and had no criminal record or any file at the Régie du logement.

Among other reasons, the lessor refused this candidate because he did not want her to share the dwelling with others who would not have not have been his lessees.

The complete or partial subletting of the dwelling is legal and prohibiting it is against public order.

In addition, a lessee may share a dwelling with other occupants who are not signatories to the lease without subletting, even partially, his dwelling.

By acting as he did, the lessor therefore deprived the lessee of her right to assign the lease.

Wilson c. Hamnawa (October 1, 2020)

The lessor applied for resiliation of the lease.

The Tribunal dismissed the lessor’s application.

The lessor sent the lessee a notice informing her that she had to move within three months because of changes to the composition of her household. The notice contained the new address and date the relocation was to take effect, but the lessor took no other steps.

The lessee was not asked to visit the dwelling so she could verify whether it met the allocation rules and thus decide whether she should apply for a review of the lessor’s decision to relocate her.

The notice sent did not allow the lessee to refuse a dwelling she had not even visited. The fact that the lessee did not act or inform herself does not amount to a refusal to move.

The lessor could not conclude that the lessee refused the dwelling because she did not file an application for review.

Coopérative d'habitation l'Infini c. Proulx (December 1, 2021)

The lessor applied for:

• a determination that the lease had ended and was not renewed
• eviction of the lessee

The Tribunal dismissed the lessor’s application.

Following a dispute, the lessee stopped being a member of the cooperative where he was living. The cooperative’s internal management by-law was subsequently amended to provide that lessees who lost their status as members had to leave their dwellings when the lease ended.

The lessee did not contest the notice of modification to the lease informing him of this departure clause and was deemed to have accepted it. The clause is without effect with respect to the lessee, however, because he was entitled to remain in the premises.

This right may be overridden, but only in cases prescribed by law. Neither the Civil Code of Québec nor the Cooperatives Act states that the lease for a dwelling leased in a housing cooperative ends when the lessee stops being a member of the cooperative.

Coopérative d'habitation Tiohtiake c. Thivierge (October 15, 2021)

The lessor applies for the resiliation of the lease.

The lease is resiliated.

The lessee no longer lives in the dwelling, but he pays the rent. By no longer occupying the dwelling, he violates his obligation to use the dwelling with prudence and diligence, which causes serious prejudice to the lessor and deprives a family of subsidized housing, when there is a long waiting list.

Office régional d'habitation d'Argenteuil c. Millier (December 16, 2021)

*Application for leave to appeal dismissed (C.Q., 2022-01-28)

The lessee seeks a review of the lessor's decision to strike her name off the list of persons eligible for low-income housing.

The lessor's decision is upheld.

The lessee did not mention a handicap and did not provide a medical record when she applied to be allocated a dwelling in low-rental housing.

The lessee's refusal to take possession of the dwellings offered were not justified within the meaning of the By-law respecting the allocation of dwellings in low rental housing. She did not establish that she had a physical condition likely to characterize her as a handicapped person within the meaning of the by-law and that the dwelling offered contained architectural barriers causing her difficulties of access or circulation.

Seddiki c. Office municipal d'habitation de Montréal secteur Sud-Ouest (March 3, 2022)

*Application for revocation of a decision dismissed (T.A.L. 2022-07-22).

The lessee applies to the Tribunal for:

• a declaration that his lease has been renewed

The lessor applies to the Tribunal for:

• an acknowledgment that the lease has been terminated
• an order for the lessee to vacate the dwelling

The Tribunal declares that the lease was renewed.

The parties are bound by a low-rental housing lease, even if they signed a standard lease agreement form (art. 1984 C.C.Q.).

When a low-rental housing lease concerns a private lessor, that is, a lessor other than a local housing authority, the rent increase does not fall under the general rules set out in art. 1942 and seq. of the Civil Code of Québec.

The lease did not end because the lessee refused the rent increase, even though the dwelling is in a building built less than five years ago, because the exception to fixing rent under art. 1955 C.C.Q. does not apply to low-rental housing.

Kosowoj c. OBNL l'Habitation Complexe Nord (October 5, 2022)