Ontario Lease Clauses That Hold Up at the Landlord and Tenant Board

Updated: February 2026

Written by the Keith & Françoise Real Estate Team, Ontario Realtors®, with experience reviewing residential lease clauses and seeing how they are treated in real Ontario tenancy disputes.

Lease clauses are one of the most common sources of disputes in Ontario residential tenancies. Many issues arise not because a clause exists, but because it attempts to do more than clarify how the tenancy operates.

This article supports our main guide on Leasing in Ontario, which explains the full tenancy framework. This page focuses narrowly on patterns seen in clauses that tend to hold up in practice, based on how similar clauses are treated in real disputes.

What it means for a lease clause to “hold up” in Ontario

When a lease clause holds up, it is usually because it aligns with Ontario tenancy law and clarifies how existing obligations apply to a specific property or situation.

In practice, the Landlord and Tenant Board tends to focus on substance rather than wording. Clauses that reflect the Residential Tenancies Act and do not attempt to restrict tenant rights are more likely to be treated as enforceable.

Clauses that clarify responsibilities

Clauses that describe how responsibilities are carried out often hold up when they are specific, reasonable, and tied to the physical layout of the property.

Common examples include clauses that:

• Explain snow removal or lawn care responsibilities where access is clearly defined
• Describe how shared utilities are allocated when services are not separately metered
• Outline expectations for cleanliness or minor upkeep without shifting maintenance obligations

These clauses tend to work because they clarify logistics rather than change legal responsibility.

Clauses that reinforce existing legal obligations

Some clauses restate obligations that already exist under Ontario tenancy law. While these clauses do not create new rights, they often hold up because they are consistent with the law.

In practice, this includes clauses addressing:

• Tenant responsibility to avoid damage or negligent use
• Compliance with condominium rules where the rental is part of a condominium corporation
• Notice expectations that mirror statutory notice requirements

These clauses are generally treated as valid because they reflect obligations that already apply.

Why intent matters more than wording

In many disputes, similar clauses are treated differently depending on what they attempt to do. Clauses that aim to clarify are often treated more favourably than clauses that attempt to limit rights or impose penalties.

This is why broad or absolute language often creates problems, even when the intent was practical.

How this differs from illegal lease clauses

This article focuses on clauses that tend to hold up because they align with Ontario tenancy rules. It does not attempt to catalogue clauses that fail outright.

For examples of clauses that commonly create compliance issues, see Illegal Lease Clauses in Ontario.

Where lease clauses fit into the broader tenancy framework

Lease clauses are only one part of a residential tenancy. Even well-drafted clauses do not replace proper tenant screening, statutory notice requirements, or correct termination procedures.

For the full leasing framework and how clauses interact with other tenancy rules, return to our main guide on Leasing in Ontario.

Frequently Asked Questions

This page is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Ontario tenancy outcomes depend on specific facts and current legislation. For authoritative guidance, consult Tribunals Ontario or a qualified Ontario legal professional.