A tenant telephones the lessor to inform him that intruders had tried to break into her dwelling and that the mosquito net on the balcony had been damaged in the process. She added that she had called the police and that the latter they had made a report of the incident.
The facts
During their telephone conversation, the tenant notified the lessor that she wished to install a wire screen on the door, as well as a movement activated light on her balcony.
The lessor replies to the tenant that under the terms one of the lease clauses, she does not have the right to install the wire screening and the light and that she must obtain the lessor's written authorization beforehand. The tenant installed the wire screen and the movement activated light just the same. She refused to remove the screen and the light and also to repair the holes made in the brickwork. The tenant is 70 years old and lives alone. She argued that she installed the light and screen on the door at the recommendation of the police because she is fearful. Her dwelling is located on the first floor and it is easy to access it. She argued that the doors of the dwellings were changed by the lessor and that the door of her dwelling was replaced by a door which is glazed over 70% of its surface.
The applicable law
Article 1856 of the Civil Code of Quebec prohibits the tenant from changing the form or the destination of the leased property during the term of the lease. The Civil Code doesn't state the conditions or criteria for respecting the form and destination of the property. In a recent decision, the Québec Rental Board cited the legal expert P.G. Jobin:
“It will be all the more easy to establish the fault of the tenant for this reason when the change
in question causes harm to the lessor. It is generally considered that this obligation is violated when the change increases the insurance premiums or the property taxes payable by the lessor, when it increases the risk of fire, when it affects the structure of the building or when it causes a drop in its market value.”
In addition, article 1856 only applies to substantial modifications to the property, or at least those which are serious and which have a certain permanence. ” (1)
The decision of the Rental Board
In this particular case the Rental Board ruled that the work carried out by the tenant did not affect the value of the building or constitute a safety risk:
“The Court is rather of the opinion that this work constitutes an improvement to the building, and concerns the protection and safety of the tenant. Moreover, the evidence reveals that the lessor replaced the tenant's door himself during the term of the lease with a door which comprises a larger glazed surface. With regard movement activated light, the lessor did not prove that it had been badly installed and were no longer safe. ” (2)
Repairs to the premises
However, the Court reminded the tenant that when she leaves at the end of her lease, that she will have to comply with the rules of article 1891 of the Civil Code of Quebec and return the premises to their original condition. Article 1891 states as follows:
art. 1891. “Upon termination of the lease, the lessee is bound to remove all the constructions, works or plantations he has made. If they cannot be removed without deteriorating the property, the lessor may retain them by paying the value thereof to the lessee or compel the lessee to remove them and to restore the property to the condition in which it was when he received it. If the property cannot be restored to its original condition, the lessor may retain the constructions, works or plantations without compensation.”
The tenant was thus given the right to keep the wire screen and the movement activated light for as long as her lease will remain in effect. However, when she leaves the dwelling at the end of the lease, the tenant will have to remove the screen and the movement activated light, as well as adequately repairing the holes in the brick wall.
1.Gestion Turret Inc. C. Mc Allister (2007) J.L. p. 308
2.2. Opus citare p. 308