The case of Horn Ventures International Inc.v.Horn Plastics Inc.involved a lease that required the tenant to leave the premises clean and in good repair.Instead,the defendant removed equipment not included in the agreement and damaged the premises in the process.What was the result?
A) The Court determined that the premises had to be left in the same condition they were in when the tenant took possession, except for normal wear and tear, and there was an award for damages and lost income.
B) The Court determined that the premises had to be left in the same condition they were in when the tenant took possession, except for normal wear and tear and there was an award for only damages.
C) The tenants had been evicted without cause, and so the landlord was required to pay damages on the counterclaim.
D) The conduct of the landlord resulted in a forfeiture of the lease, so no damages were payable.
E) The Court determined that the premises had been left in better condition than they were in when the tenant took possession, and hence there was no award of damages.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q8: As part of his preparation for a
Q37: Which of the following is true with
Q65: Pete is an accountant and Judy works
Q66: Maureen,who frequently developed gadgets,had an idea for
Q67: Jurg was hosting a luncheon when his
Q68: In Durham Condominium Corporation No.123 v.Amberwood Investments
Q69: Which of the following is false with
Q71: Which of the following is false with
Q72: Paul and Robert designed a new disc
Q73: In Spycher Estate v.J.L.Coulter Ltd.,a mobile home
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents