Ontario is considering a new regulatory framework that could significantly reshape how landlords and property managers respond to illegal drug activity in their buildings. The proposed regulations under the Measures Respecting Premises with Illegal Drug Activity Act, 2025 (MRPIDAA) introduce new responsibilities, heightened risks, and expanded enforcement tools that rental housing providers are advised to prepare for. The Ministries of the Solicitor General and Municipal Affairs and Housing are currently consulting on these proposals, and apartment owners have until March 8, 2026, to provide feedback through the Regulatory Registry.
“MRPIDAA is intended to curb illegal drug production and trafficking by placing clear obligations on those who control or manage properties,” said Kristin A. Ley, Partner at Cohen Highley LLP Lawyers. “For landlords, this means a more explicit duty to prevent illegal drug activity to avoid steep penalties if they knowingly allow it to occur. It also expands police powers in ways that could directly affect building operations, tenant relations, and property access.”
The Act creates new provincial offences, with penalties that may include fines of up to $250,000 for corporations and fines and/or imprisonment for individuals. These penalties would apply to landlords, property owners, managers, and even tenants who sublet if they are found to have knowingly permitted their premises to be used for illegal drug activities such as production, trafficking, or possession of proceeds related to these offences. If police have reasonable grounds to believe illegal drug activity is occurring, they may seize evidence, order the closure of non‑residential spaces used for illegal drug activity, and even recover certain enforcement costs from responsible parties. For housing providers, particularly in mixed‑use or multi‑tenant buildings, these expanded powers could create significant operational challenges.
According to Ley, the Ministries are considering formally designating offences related to unauthorized production of controlled substances, unauthorized production of precursors, and trafficking activities; they are also considering exemptions for housing providers whose operations differ from typical private‑market rentals, recognizing that many operate within regulated care or social‑service frameworks. Proposed exempt categories include retirement and long‑term care homes, student residences, rehabilitative or therapeutic programs, short‑term respite care, accommodations governed by specific provincial statutes, among others.
For all housing providers impacted, Ley suggests conducting a formal review of policies to ensure lease agreements, screening processes, and building guidelines clearly prohibit illegal drug activity and outline consequences for violations.
“Because the Act focuses on what landlords ‘knowingly permit,’ maintaining clear records of inspections, complaints, and follow‑up actions will become essential,” she said, adding that front‑line staff and property managers should be trained to recognize what constitutes illegal drug activity, understand early signs of potential risk, and know when and how to address concerns appropriately.
At the same time, landlords should balance “vigilance with respect for tenant rights,” taking reasonable, non‑intrusive steps—such as improving lighting, enhancing access controls, and conducting routine checks of common areas—to reduce the likelihood of illegal activity and support a safer building environment.
How other provinces approach drug activity
While most provinces already allow landlords to end a tenancy for illegal activity, none currently impose a separate, proactive duty to prevent drug‑related conduct in rental units. In British Columbia, Alberta, and across the Prairies and Atlantic provinces, drug activity is handled within existing tenancy laws—typically as a ground for eviction when it endangers safety, damages property, or constitutes a substantial breach.
By contrast, Ontario’s proposed MRPIDAA framework goes further by creating a stand‑alone legal regime that prohibits landlords from “knowingly permitting” drug activity and may require them to take “reasonable measures” to prevent it, with potential penalties outside the normal Residential Tenancies Act process. In other words, where other provinces give landlords tools to respond to illegal activity, Ontario is shifting toward a model that makes landlords active participants in prevention and enforcement, creating obligations that do not currently exist elsewhere in Canada.
That said, the regulations are not final, and apartment owners have an opportunity to shape how the Act is implemented. Feedback can be submitted through the Ontario Regulatory Registry at regulatoryregistry.gov.on.ca.
