An owner brought a CAT application alleging she was experiencing unreasonable noise from a common element garage grate and unreasonable noise, odour, smoke and vapour from a common element industrial vent. At Stage 3, the condo made a preliminary submission that the CAT did not have jurisdiction to hear the dispute because it was a
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…
Last month, we blogged about the importance of having clear and concise governing documents. A recent CAT decision highlights the value of communicating rules to residents and how poor communication might lead to unnecessary disputes.
In this case, the CAT dismissed a dispute relating to the “communication of rules” because it had no jurisdiction…
The Condominium Authority Tribunal (“CAT”) and Superior Court operate on virtual platforms, with CAT hearings typically concluding via written argument. These forums have their own rules and directions and, occasionally, comments from adjudicators to guide process. This decision from the Superior Court comments on using written materials efficiently and to win in modern practice.
Although the CAT’s jurisdiction has been expanded since its inception, the CAT’s decision in Brady v. PCC 947 is a reminder that disputes outside section 117(2) of the Condo Act will likely be dismissed even though owner-applicants have succeeded in other forums.
A unit owner brought a CAT application against the condo corporation for banging…
A recent CAT decision considered whether a condo’s claim for indemnification for legal costs in issuing a compliance letter was reasonable and whether the owner was required pay it.
The condo issued a compliance letter to the owner citing multiple incidents of noise, nuisance and harassment and demanded the owner reimburse the condo for the cost of the letter. The owner requested the security incident reports that allegedly supported the compliance letter but paid the condo’s requested costs after receiving a second notice of intent to lien. The owner challenged the chargeback and argued that the action taken by the condo in sending the letter without any warning was unreasonable and so were the costs.Continue Reading Compliance costs must be reasonable – prove it or lose it
In the 2022 Condo Conference Issue of our newsletter, we hash out our office debate on whether Stan, the Akita, should stay or go and recap some best practices in leasing common elements. Thanks to the CAT for this issue’s content!
We are proud to sponsor and present at this year’s Condo Conference, taking…
In November 2017, the Condominium Authority Tribunal (“CAT”) was born as Ontario’s first fully online tribunal. “How would we manage this weird new thing?” we thought.
What started as a records dispute venue has now evolved into a place for pets, vehicles and storage and, most recently, unreasonable nuisances, annoyances or disruptions.
With the growth of the subject matter, we also see a slow but promising trend in cost recovery. For a few years no costs were ordered for defending or bringing applications except in very, VERY rare circumstances.
The CAT can award costs up to $25,000.
The latest issue of our newsletter reports on changes to the OHSA dealing with washroom access for workers and a CAT decision about a wooden barrier.
Enjoy the summer!
Two recent decisions from the CAT deal with parties asking to adjourn their matters for medical reasons.
In Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 132 v. Evans, 2022 ONCAT 38, the condo brought an application to the CAT regarding a parking dispute with an owner on how their parking impacts snow removal in the condo…