body: I am a real estate agent based in Toronto and I was looking over a lease agreement that a friend of mine signed. I noticed that 5-7 out of the 25 clauses in the agreement were in direct contravention of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 (the primary piece of legislation governing rules for tenants and landlords).
  
  
  Now I was curious, as these clauses which are not legal aren't in relation to the core of the agreement (if there is such a thing), so would the fact that there are multiple clauses in contravention if the act, albeit minor, mean that he contract lacked lawful object?
  
  
  I apologize in advance if I've muddled terminology here, as you can imagine, I'm not a lawyer.
  
  
  
title: Legal Object in a Contract