Todd W. Devitt

The applicant commercial tenant brought an application for damages for the tort of conversion, alleging the respondent landlord wrongly interfered with his property after the termination of his lease.

The respondent landlord brought a separate application seeking to declare the applicant a vexatious litigant.

The court dismissed the applicant's conversion claim, finding that he had intentionally abandoned his property by refusing to retrieve it despite multiple opportunities and court orders.

The court also dismissed the respondent's vexatious litigant application, concluding that while the applicant's conduct was troubling and in bad faith, it did not meet the high threshold required for such a declaration.

Costs of $2,500 were awarded to the respondent.

The applicant commercial tenant sought relief from forfeiture and an injunction against eviction, arguing the landlord orally agreed to defer rent payments until the tenant resolved third-party litigation.

The respondent landlord denied the agreement and relied on a subsequent written settlement agreement negotiated by counsel, which the tenant breached.

The court found no indefinite oral agreement to defer rent and held that the written settlement agreement, despite missing a word, was unambiguous in context and binding.

The court also held the tenant was bound by his solicitor's ostensible authority.

The application was dismissed and the interim injunction dissolved.