April 2024
The Superior Court of Justice, Small Claims Court and Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT or Tribunal) were busy throughout 2023 addressing condominium corporation matters.
Here we present noteworthy rulings impacting on or clarifying proper conduct for condominium corporations and residents.
Civility
There is no excuse for being abusive, mean or disruptive to others.
A resident complained that another resident was transmitting smoke from their unit which was prohibited according to corporation rules. The individual making the complaint was found to be causing a nuisance by harassing condominium staff, the other resident and their family. Costs were awarded against her.
York Condominium Corporation No. 444 v. Ryan, 2023 ONCAT 81 (“York”)
Fire Safety
Toronto Fire Services inspecting a condo unit identified fire hazards that resulted from hoarding. The owners failed to comply with a Toronto Fire Services (TFS) order, and an order from the condominium corporation to comply with the TFS order to address these fire hazards.
The court’s noting the condominium corporation’s potential liability for Fire Code violations should serve as a warning they can be held responsible for fire safety issues in common areas and in units.
York Condominium Corporation No. 221 v. Mazur (“Mazur”)
Board Authority over Common Elements
An owner installed a new garage door and front door without seeking corporation permission. The corporation brought an application before the court to ensure compliance. The court decision noted that their role is not to make decisions about property management, and that owners must accept their board’s jurisdiction to make decisions relating to common elements.
Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 123 v Newton (“Newton”)
Director Access to Records
A unit owner and director sought access to corporation records, only some of which were provided. The application for remaining records was denied because it was made in his capacity as a director. CAT does not address applications made by a director for records.
Sharma v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2510, 2023 ONCAT 39 (“Sharma”)
Odours, Vapours, Smells and Smoke
One resident complained to the Tribunal there were odours, vapours, smells and smoke coming through their vents. CAT determined this was a maintenance and repair issue and not within its jurisdiction. Had this been a problem relating to activities taking place in another unit, the resident would have had a greater likelihood of success.
Rahman v. Peel Standard Condominium Corporation No. 779, 2023 ONCAT 37 (“Rahman”)
Condo Renovations
One owner received approval to renovate their kitchen and washroom, and to use the service elevator. When approving this request, the board required that renovations be completed in four days and service elevator access restricted to 20 minutes on two occasions. Owner requests for an extension were denied.
The court found that the board’s position was arbitrary and not reasonable, and awarded the owner nearly $40,000 in damages.
Moran v. Peel Condominium Corporation No. 485 (“Moran”)
Disruptive Tenants – Being a Nuisance
Reimbursement of Legal Expenses
A tenant was verbally abusive to condominium staff. They were disruptive, noisy and left debris in the halls. The unit owner failed to ensure their tenant complied with condominium rules or evict them.
CAT ordered the owner to ensure compliance with condo rules, and the tenant to cease their disruptive activities. While it is not common for CAT to award a corporation “compensation” for legal expenses, these actions were sufficiently clear and egregious that costs were awarded.
Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2804 v. Micoli et al., 2023 ONCAT 21 (“Micoli”)
Forcing the Sale of a Condo Unit
A resident with a substance abuse problem was described by the court as “aggressive, rude, profane, and disrespectful.” He had criminal convictions. The condominium corporation sought to require him to sell his unit. The court disagreed and felt this action would be too harsh.
Ordering an owner to sell their unit is a draconian remedy courts are reluctant to grant. A history of refusal to abide by condo rules, bad conduct and possibly court orders should be established before asking the court to consider ordering the sale of a unit.
Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2581 v. Paterno (“Paterno”)
