Serving Ontario's condominium communities since 2008
Happy New Year to our readers.
We hope 2024 is a year of peace, balance and prosperity. We present our top ten condo law cases of 2023 in our newest issue of Condo Alert!
Here’s hoping the past decisions help us in navigating noise, nuisance vs. maintenance, repair and chargeback disputes and promote our oft…
Toronto often ranks amongst the dog-friendliest cities in the world. Sadly, this sentiment does not necessarily apply to condos in the city. Through its governing docs, condos can impose an outright prohibition on dogs from entering the premises; it can also impose weight, size or breed-related prohibitions. However, these prohibitions do not take precedence over…
Condo living is unpredictable and there’s always something new…yet I write about chargebacks, indemnity clauses and Amlani all too often. The law is settled: condos cannot charge back enforcement-related costs – specifically legal letters – without a court order, despite how any indemnification provisions are drafted. As the CAT and Courts have reaffirmed:
…It is
Owners are not allowed to modify the common elements as they please. Though owners have broader rights regarding their individual “units”, the line between “units” and “common elements” can often blur, leading to escalated disputes.
In Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 132 v Newton , an owner installed a new garage door and front slab door…
Parties seeking costs awards from the CAT must understand that the Tribunal has the discretion to award costs: even if a party is entirely successful on their claim, there is no guarantee it will receive its full costs, if any. In January 2022, the CAT published a practice direction which informs the public how the…
Before CAT, condominiums typically brought compliance applications under s. 134 of the Condo Act to force unwilling residents to comply with the Condo Act and the condo’s declaration, by-laws and rules. And beyond ordering compliance with the Condo Act, declaration, by-laws and rules, judges have the broad discretion to “grant such other relief as is…
Being a condominium director is often a thankless job: most condominium directors in Ontario serve on an unpaid volunteer basis to deal with big-ticket items such the corporation’s finances, maintenance and repair and rule enforcement all while inevitably making themselves a target for unhappy owners. Generally speaking, the Condo Act and a condominium’s by-laws requirements…
The current records request procedure under section 55 of the Condo Act has been around for almost four years now. Still, there remains confusion as to how records requests should be processed. One question we often get is whether the board can charge owners a photocopying/labour fee for records and, if so, how much can they charge?
“It depends” is the classic non-answer to this question.Continue Reading Condo records: To fee or not to fee? That is the question.
We wrote about condo meetings and election pitfalls in the past (see HERE and HERE) but those articles focused on “what happens at the meeting/election”. A recent Superior Court decision highlights the dangers of poor meeting notices – these meetings were essentially dead before they hit the ground.
Continue Reading Hell hath no fury like condo scorn: avoiding meeting and election woes
We were recently successful in obtaining a stay from a civil action involving our condominium client and a neighbouring condominium. The two condos were parties to a Reciprocal Agreement and Indemnity Agreement (the “Agreements”) and after a dispute arose with respect to these agreements, our client submitted the issues to mediation and arbitration. The neighbouring condo responded by bringing a civil action against our client where a corporate unit owner (which happened to own 100% of the neighbouring condominium units) was included as a co-plaintiff.
Section 132 of the Condo Act provides that any disputes “pertaining to agreements between two or more condominium corporations deemed to contain a provision submitting the disputes to mediation/arbitration”. The neighbouring condo and corporate unit owner attempted to avoid mediation/arbitration by arguing that their civil action was based on an economic tort and the corporate unit owner was not a condominium corporation that was party to the Agreements.
