Last updated: September 10, 2026 · Reading time: approx. 13 minutes
Ontario No-Pet Clauses: What Section 14 Really Means for Tenants
Rental pet rights & pet policy · Reviewed against Ontario legislation, Tribunals Ontario and Condominium Authority guidance.
Ontario is famous for the rule that a landlord cannot simply write “no pets” into an ordinary residential lease and make that prohibition enforceable. That rule is real — but it is often repeated too broadly. Section 14 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 voids a no-pet provision in a tenancy agreement. It does not erase condominium governing documents, excuse pet-caused damage or serious interference, override safety law, or guarantee that every pet dispute ends in the tenant's favour.
Ontario pet-clause rule: the short version
Ordinary lease clause: Section 14 says a tenancy-agreement provision prohibiting animals in or about the residential complex is void.
Condo: A rented condominium is different. Condo declarations, by-laws and rules can restrict or prohibit pets, and occupants are generally required to comply with those governing documents.
Pet deposit: A separate pet or damage deposit is generally not permitted under the RTA. That rule comes from Ontario's security-deposit provisions, not from Section 14 itself.
Eviction: The mere existence of a pet is not enough to enforce a void lease ban, but pet-related conduct, serious allergy, danger, damage or valid condo restrictions can create a real tenancy issue.
The exact core rule: Section 14 of Ontario's Residential Tenancies Act
Section 14 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 states that a provision in a tenancy agreement prohibiting the presence of animals in or about the residential complex is void. In practical terms, an ordinary landlord cannot turn a blanket no-pet term in the lease into an enforceable tenancy obligation simply because the tenant signed it.
Ontario's official Standard Lease Guide reinforces the point: additional terms that do not allow pets are examples of void and unenforceable lease terms. The same guide immediately adds an important qualification — a landlord can require a tenant in a condominium to comply with condominium rules, which may prohibit certain pets.
What Section 14 does — and does not — do
| Situation | General Ontario rule | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Ordinary lease says “no pets” | Clause is void | RTA Section 14 directly voids a tenancy-agreement provision prohibiting animals. |
| Landlord asks for a separate pet deposit | Generally not permitted | RTA security-deposit rules limit what a landlord may collect; the Standard Lease Guide lists pet/damage deposits as prohibited terms. |
| Condo declaration or valid rule restricts pets | Can be enforceable | Condo occupants must comply with applicable governing documents; pet provisions can regulate number, size, type or presence of animals. |
| Pet repeatedly causes substantial interference | Can support an LTB case | RTA Section 76 allows the Board to consider specified animal-related grounds when a termination application is based on an animal. |
| Pet causes serious allergic reaction | Can support an LTB case | Serious allergic reaction is expressly addressed in RTA Section 76, with causation still relevant. |
| Animal creates serious safety concern | Can support stronger termination grounds | Safety impairment can lead to a different notice/process, and Section 76 addresses inherently dangerous species or breeds. |
| Pet causes wilful or negligent undue damage | Damage rules can apply | Pet ownership does not shield a tenant from ordinary RTA liability for tenant-caused or pet-related damage. |
The condo exception people get wrong
A common internet claim says that Section 14 automatically defeats every condominium pet restriction. Ontario's own guidance says otherwise. The province's Standard Lease Guide tells condominium tenants that they are agreeing to follow the condominium declaration, by-laws and rules provided by the landlord. It specifically notes that those rules may prohibit certain pets.
The Condominium Authority of Ontario is even more explicit: condo governing documents may prohibit pets entirely, limit the number of animals, impose size or weight limits, restrict species or breeds, and regulate where animals may be taken on the property. Section 119 of the Condominium Act, 1998 requires owners and occupiers to comply with the Act and the corporation's governing documents.
Condo rules are not unlimited. Rules must meet the requirements of the Condominium Act, and human-rights accommodation can also matter — particularly where an animal assists with disability-related needs. But those are separate analyses; Section 14 is not a universal trump card over the condo's governing documents.
Pet deposits: illegal result, different legal reason
A separate “pet deposit,” “animal damage deposit” or similar refundable security deposit is generally not permitted under Ontario's RTA. Section 105 says the only security deposit a landlord may collect is the rent deposit allowed under Section 106. Ontario's Standard Lease Guide likewise identifies damage and pet deposits as examples of deposits or fees that are not permitted.
A lawful key deposit is a separate issue under Ontario's rules and should not be confused with a pet deposit.
When a pet can still put an Ontario tenancy at risk
Section 76 is the provision that prevents the “no-pet clause is void, therefore nothing can ever happen” misunderstanding. When an eviction application based on certain termination grounds is rooted in the presence, control or behaviour of an animal, the LTB must be satisfied that the statutory animal-related criteria are met.
Substantial interference
Past behaviour of an animal of that species must have substantially interfered with the reasonable enjoyment of the residential complex, and the tenant's animal must have caused or contributed to that interference.
Serious allergic reaction
The presence of an animal of that species must have caused a landlord or another tenant to suffer a serious allergic reaction, with the tenant's animal contributing to it.
Inherent danger
Section 76 also refers to an animal species or breed that is inherently dangerous to the safety of the landlord or other tenants.
Damage or safety conduct
Separate RTA grounds can apply where conduct causes undue damage or seriously impairs another person's safety. The exact notice depends on the alleged facts.
This is why it is inaccurate to reduce Ontario pet law to “three N5 reasons.” Different facts can engage different statutory grounds and different notice forms. Tribunals Ontario's current guidance identifies the N5 for matters such as interference or wilful/negligent undue damage, while an N7 can be used for specified serious safety problems or other serious grounds.
N5 vs. N7: do not treat every pet dispute as the same notice
| Issue alleged by landlord | Possible process | What the tenant should know |
|---|---|---|
| Substantial interference / disturbance | N5 may be used | A first N5 generally has a correction period. The notice is not itself an eviction order. |
| Wilful or negligent undue damage | N5 may be used | Tribunals Ontario says a first N5 for this ground generally gives an opportunity to repair, replace or pay reasonable costs within the applicable period. |
| Serious impairment of safety | N7 may be used | An N7 can have a shorter notice period and is not the same process as a curable first N5. |
| Pet exists despite ordinary lease no-pet wording, with no other valid ground | Section 14 is central | A void lease prohibition alone is not the same thing as proving an RTA ground for eviction. |
| Pet violates condo governing documents | Condo + tenancy law may intersect | Do not analyze this only through Section 14; obtain the condo documents and get situation-specific advice. |
What to do if your landlord says “remove the pet or move out”
1. Identify the legal source of the complaint
Is the landlord pointing only to a clause in the lease, or is there an allegation about noise, damage, allergy, safety, municipal law or condominium governing documents? The answer changes the analysis.
2. If you rent a condo, get the governing documents
Ask for the declaration, by-laws and rules. Do not assume a landlord-written clause and a condo rule have the same legal status.
3. Keep communications and evidence
Save the lease, emails, notices, photos of unit condition, complaint details and any records showing how you addressed a legitimate pet-related issue.
4. Do not ignore an official LTB notice
A notice is not an eviction order, but it can start a legal process with strict dates. Read the exact form and current instructions rather than relying on a generic internet script.
5. Use current Ontario legal resources
Check Tribunals Ontario / Navigate Tribunals Ontario, Steps to Justice, a community legal clinic or a licensed Ontario lawyer or paralegal when the tenancy is genuinely at risk.
A safer written response to a simple no-pet demand
If the landlord's demand appears to rely only on an ordinary lease no-pet term, a short factual response is usually better than threatening litigation or declaring that every possible notice is “illegal.”
This template is general information, not legal advice. If an N5, N7, L2 application, condo enforcement notice or other formal document has already been served, use the instructions for that document and obtain legal advice where appropriate.
Can a landlord refuse an applicant because they have a pet?
Do not confuse the protection of Section 14 with a blanket right to be selected as a prospective tenant. Section 14 voids a no-pet provision in a tenancy agreement. Ontario legal-information guidance notes that landlords can ask prospective tenants about pets and may refuse an application because of ordinary pet ownership.
Human-rights law can change that analysis when the animal is connected to disability-related needs. The Ontario Human Rights Commission states that a housing provider must accommodate disability-related use of a service animal to the point of undue hardship. A “no pets” policy cannot simply be used to screen out a person who needs a service animal because of a disability.
What about breed, size and number restrictions?
The safest answer depends on where the restriction comes from. Section 14 clearly voids a tenancy-agreement provision that prohibits animals. But a condo corporation's declaration, by-laws or rules can contain pet provisions dealing with number, size, weight, type or breed, and municipal or provincial law may independently regulate particular animals.
For that reason, this guide does not claim that every breed, weight or number restriction appearing anywhere in Ontario housing is automatically void. First identify whether the rule comes from the lease, the condo's governing documents or another law.
Frequently asked questions
Is a no-pet clause in an Ontario lease enforceable?
Can an Ontario condo prohibit pets even though Section 14 exists?
Can my landlord charge a pet deposit in Ontario?
Can I be evicted just because I got a dog?
Is an N5 notice an eviction order?
Does a landlord have to accept my rental application if I own a pet?
Bottom line for Ontario tenants with pets
The memorable Ontario rule is still correct: a landlord-written no-pet provision in an ordinary tenancy agreement is void under Section 14. The mistake is turning that one sentence into “pets can never cause an eviction” or “condo rules do not matter.”
For a real dispute, identify the source of the rule first. Lease clause? Condo governing document? Noise or damage allegation? Serious allergy or safety issue? Once that is clear, the RTA, the LTB process and — where relevant — condominium or human-rights law can be applied correctly.
Keep your pet records organized
Use Patify to keep useful pet information and records together for everyday care and housing-related documentation.
Explore PatifyThis article provides general legal information, not legal advice. Legislation, forms, tribunal procedures and condominium rules can change. Check the current official source for your situation.
![[2026 Warning] Fake ESA Letter Evictions: How Landlords Are Catching Pet Owners](https://images.unsplash.com/photo-1548199973-03cce0bbc87b?auto=format&fit=crop&w=1200&q=80)