Yes No Share to Facebook
Frustrated Tenancies:
Impossibility of Continued Occupancy
Last Updated: July 02 2026
Question: When a residential unit becomes unoccupiable due to a fire, flood, or municipal condemnation, who can help a tenant understand whether the doctrine of frustration ends the tenancy under Ontario law and what steps the tenant should take next?
Answer: Lippa Legal Services can help tenants in Ontario, including in Vaughan and the surrounding GTA, understand when a tenancy may be treated as frustrated under section 19 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 and what recourse may still be available, including what to do if repairs are lengthy or the unit is declared uninhabitable or prohibited by a condemnation order; for example, a condemned complex can terminate the tenancy by operation of law, and in longer restoration timelines tenants may not have security of tenure such as a first right of refusal to return, so get advice early about notice, documentation, and dispute options; to speak with a paralegal about your situation, call (416) 241-4529.
Understanding When the Doctrine of Frustration Applies to a Residential Tenancy and What Recourse Does a Tenant Have?
Incidents that cause serious damage such as a fire, a tornado, a flood, a major water leak, or some other catastrophic circumstance, may occur and cause impossibility of occupancy of a residential unit. Even a change in law may occur in such a way as to make compliance impossible. When a tenancy is made impossible due to unforeseeable outside forces, such is referred to as a force majeure event, and the legal result is that the statutory obligations as well as the contractual obligations of the landlord and the tenant come to an end as per section 19 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, Chapter 17. This ending of the tenancy relationship due to the frustrating event occurs regardless of whether the frustrating event happens within a lease period or happens afterwards when the lease is expired and the tenure is converted into a month-to-month arrangement. Specifically, the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 says:
19 The doctrine of frustration of contract and the Frustrated Contracts Act apply with respect to tenancy agreements.
Condemnation
In some circumstances, premises may become unoccupiable when ordered condemned by the local municipality such as occurred in the case of AS v. CJM, TSL-05808-10 (Re), 2010 CanLII 58985 wherein it was stated:
1. At the hearing before me the parties filed an order dated September 27, 2010 issued by the City of Toronto that says the residential complex is unsafe and that occupancy of the rental unit is prohibited.
2. As I explained at the hearing section 19 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 (the ‘Act’) says: “The doctrine of frustration of contract and the Frustrated Contracts Act apply with respect to tenancy agreements.” Essentially the doctrine of frustration says that when a contract becomes impossible of performance, then the contract has come to an end. As the doctrine applies to residential tenancy agreements what this means is that when a residential complex cannot be physically lived in anymore because it has been condemned, the tenancy has come to an end by operation of law.
3. As a result, an order will issue declaring the tenancy termination by operation of the doctrine of frustration.
Accordingly, and apparently, despite that premises may become condemned due to the neglect of the landlord, as a matter of law, frustration of the tenancy agreement, and thereby termination of the tenancy agreement with corresponding termination of the tenancy, results when the premises are officially condemned.
Ceasing of Security of Tenure
Where a tenancy agreement is deemed frustrated, such as in circumstances where a fire requires restorative work that will be extensive and take considerable time, the security of tenure, including first right of refusal to return following restorative work, is absent. Only where the restorative work can be done in a reasonable amount of time will the tenancy agreement be without frustration and therefore with security of tenure protected as per the case of Y.Y. v. A.T. and L.W., TEL-32649-12 (Re), 2013 CanLII 51226 where it was said:
1. The Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 did apply to this unit from June 1, 2012 until December 1, 2012. At that time the unit was deemed uninhabitable and the tenancy agreement became frustrated pursuant to the Frustrated Contracts Act and as permitted under section 19 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 (RTA).
2. As a result of the lengthy period of time required to make repairs to the unit there is no foreseeable date that the Tenants would be permitted back into the rental unit. There is no requirement under the RTA for the Landlord to offer the Tenants first right of refusal when the unit does become habitable.
3. Based on the evidence provided and the fact this vacancy of the rental unit is not for a short period of time I have deemed the rental contract to be frustrated as of December 1, 2012.
Summary Comment
When a serious force majeure event occurs, rendering the premises unoccupiable for an unforeseeable length of time, the tenancy agreement, whether within a lease period or month-to-month period, becomes frustrated and all obligations cease including the security of tenure usually enjoyed by the tenant.
NOTE: A considerable number of online searches featuring “lawyers near me” or “best lawyer in” frequently indicate a pressing requirement for competent legal assistance rather than a particular profession title. In Ontario, “licensed paralegals” operate under the same Law Society that governs lawyers and are permitted to represent clients in specified litigation cases. Advocacy, legal evaluation, and procedural expertise are fundamental to this position. Lippa Legal Services provides legal representation within its authorized framework, focusing on strategic positioning, evidence preparation, and compelling advocacy to attain efficient and beneficial outcomes for clients.