Case Study

Eviction for interference with reasonable enjoyment (N5) · Brampton · LTB-L-086747-25

Ontario LTB order in Brampton · February 26, 2026 · Granted

🕑 Case timeline

Application Date: Not Available

Hearing Date: February 19, 2026

Order Issued: February 26, 2026

Termination Date: Not Available

Eviction Deadline: Not Available

ℹ️ Case overview

Case Number: LTB-L-086747-25
Address: UPPER PORTION-100 FARTHINGALE CRES, BRAMPTON, ON L7A1W8
Form Used: N8
Amount Awarded: $4,384.50
Decision In Favor: Landlord
Application Type: Eviction for interference with reasonable enjoyment (N5)
RTA Sections: Section 69

👥 Parties involved

Landlord: Prasanth Premkumar
Landlord Rep: Mansi Shah
Tenant: Sandy Nava
Tenant Rep: No Representative Listed
Adjudicator: Vinuri Sivalingam
Keywords: eviction, non-payment of rent, persistent late payment, interference with reasonable enjoyment, rent arrears

⚖️ Decision summary

This Landlord application — Eviction for interference with reasonable enjoyment (N5) — was granted.

📑 Findings & determinations

It is ordered that: 1. The L2 application based on N8 Notice of Termination is dismissed since the issue of eviction is moot. 2. The tenancy between the Landlord and the Tenant is terminated as of January 3, 2026, the date the Tenant moved out of the rental unit. 3. The Tenant shall pay to the Landlord $4,198.50. This amount includes utility costs owing. 4. The Tenant shall also pay to the Landlord $186.00 for the cost of filing the application. 5. The total amount the Tenant must pay the Landlord is $4,384.50. 6. If the Tenant does not pay the Landlord the full amount owing on or before March 9, 2026, the Tenant will start to owe interest. This will be simple interest calculated from March 10, 2026 at 4.00% annually on the balance outstanding. February 26, 2026 ____________________________ Date Issued Vinuri Sivalingam Member, Landlord and Tenant Board 15 Grosvenor Street, Ground Floor Toronto ON M7A 2G6 File Number: LTB-L-086747- 25 Order Page 3 of 3

💡 Summary points

applied for an order to terminate the tenancy and evict Sandy Nava (the 'Tenant') because: • the Tenant, another occupant of the rental unit or someone the Tenant permitted in the residential complex has substantially interfered with the reasonable enjoyment or lawful right, privilege or interest of the Landlord or another tenant; • the Tenant has been persistently late in paying the Tenant's rent. The Landlord also claimed compensation for each day the Tenant remained in the unit after the termination date. This application was heard by videoconference on February 19, 2026.
📄 View Official PDF

Share this case

🧑‍⚖️ Same adjudicator

Vinuri Sivalingam