The appellants, landlords of a multi-unit commercial property, appealed a decision finding that the respondent tenant was not responsible for the costs of repaving the parking lot.
The appellants argued that repaving fell under the lease terms for 'maintaining and repairing the property'.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the application judge that repaving was a capital expense rather than maintenance or repair, based on the wording of the lease and the reasonable expectations of the parties.
