Life outgrows leases: the job transfer, the semester abroad, the relationship that means two rents where one would do. Tenant law in both Canada and the US offers two formal exits short of breaking the lease — subletting, where you rent your place to someone else temporarily and remain the tenant, and assignment, where you transfer the lease itself and walk away — and most tenants use neither correctly. The two differ in who owes what to whom when things go wrong, landlord consent rules differ between them, and the informal third path — handing keys to a friend and hoping — reliably produces the worst outcomes available. Here is how each actually works, and how to choose.
The core distinction: who remains the tenant
In a sublet, you remain the tenant of record: the subtenant pays you (or pays the landlord on your behalf), you retain the right to return before the lease ends, and — the part people miss — you remain fully liable to the landlord for the rent and for whatever the subtenant does to the unit. Their unpaid month is your unpaid month; their damage is your damage claim. In an assignment, the lease itself transfers: the assignee steps into your position, pays the landlord directly, and — in most jurisdictions, once the assignment is properly done — your ongoing liability ends (though some leases and some US states keep the assignor secondarily liable unless the landlord releases you in writing; read for a release clause and ask for one explicitly). The choice therefore follows your plans: leaving temporarily with intent to return → sublet; leaving for good → assignment, because remaining liable for strangers' behaviour in a home you'll never see again is a risk with no compensating upside.
Consent: what landlords can and cannot refuse
Nearly everywhere, both moves require the landlord's consent — and nearly everywhere, that consent is not an unconditional veto. The dominant standard in Canadian provinces and many US states: consent may not be unreasonably withheld. Ontario's regime is a useful model: a landlord may refuse a specific proposed subtenant or assignee only on reasonable grounds (poor references, inability to pay), but if the landlord refuses assignment in principle or simply doesn't answer within seven days, the tenant gains the right to terminate the tenancy on 30 days' notice — a powerful, little-known exit lever. Other jurisdictions vary: some US states (California-style regimes) enforce whatever the lease says, including flat prohibitions; others imply reasonableness; a few give tenants statutory sublet rights leases cannot waive (New York's sublet rights in larger buildings being the famous example). Two universal rules: request consent in writing, naming the specific person with their references and income information — a specific, screenable candidate is what makes refusal unreasonable — and never accept a verbal yes, because the consent that isn't on paper doesn't exist at the tribunal.
The informal path, and why it burns people
- Unauthorized occupants are a lease breach in most jurisdictions — grounds for eviction proceedings against you, sometimes on short timelines
- You remain liable for everything while holding no paper against the person actually living there — the worst of both structures
- The occupant has no tenancy rights either, which sounds like your leverage until they stop paying and you discover 'getting them out' is legally your problem too
- Profit-charging on sublets is capped in many places — charging above your rent is itself an offence in several provinces and cities
- Deposit entanglement: the landlord returns your deposit against the unit's condition after someone you can't control lived in it
The informal handoff is almost always chosen to avoid a conversation with the landlord — and it converts one awkward email into months of liability. The formal versions exist precisely because the informal one fails so consistently; the paperwork is the protection.
Doing either properly: the paper trail
The mechanics are a checklist, not a project. For a sublet: written landlord consent; a written sublease with your subtenant mirroring the head lease's obligations (rent, dates, rules, condition), with a move-in inspection and photos exactly as if you were the landlord — because for this purpose, you are; the end date before your own lease expires (a sublease can't outrun the head lease); and your own reliable channel for confirming rent actually lands each month, since surprises here surface as eviction notices with your name on them. For an assignment: written consent to the named assignee; an assignment agreement transferring the lease with the landlord's acknowledgment; an explicit release of your future liability where obtainable; and a documented handling of the deposit — commonly settled between assignor and assignee directly, with the landlord's records updated, and worth doing carefully because deposit disputes follow whoever the paperwork forgot. In both cases, screen your replacement like a landlord would: their failure lands on your record, your reference, or your wallet depending on structure — choose someone you'd lend money to, because functionally you are.
When neither fits: the honest comparison with breaking the lease
Sometimes the timeline or the market makes both tools awkward — no subtenant materializes, the landlord drags on consent, the remaining term is short. Then the comparison becomes sublet/assign versus the lease-break paths: negotiated surrender agreements, statutory early-termination rights where they exist (domestic violence provisions, uninhabitability, the Ontario consent-refusal lever above), and the default backstop in most of Canada and many US states — the landlord's duty to mitigate by re-renting reasonably, which caps what a departing tenant actually owes at the vacancy the landlord genuinely suffered. The decision logic: assignment beats lease-breaking when a replacement exists and the landlord cooperates (you owe nothing further); a negotiated surrender beats a contested break almost always (certainty has value on both sides); and a sublet is the tool only when you truly intend to return. What every path shares: it goes better initiated early, in writing, with a specific proposal — landlords are humans running cash-flow businesses, and the tenant who arrives with "here is a qualified replacement and a clean handover plan" resolves in days what the tenant who vanished resolves at a tribunal.
Frequently Asked Questions
Grow your Landlord & Tenant practice with AI
Lexscale.ai builds AI search visibility, websites, and intake systems for landlord & tenant firms across North America. Book a free strategy call to see what would move the needle for your practice.
Book a Free Strategy Call →