CONDOMINIUM AUTHORITY TRIBUNAL
DATE: November 2, 2021 CASES: 2020-00381N, 2020-00403N, 2021-00077R
Order under section 1.44 of the Condominium Act, 1998.
Member: Maureen Carter-Whitney, Member
The Applicant: Ney Calderon, Self-Represented The Respondent: York Condominium Corporation No. 274, Represented by Luis Hernandez, Counsel
Hearing: Written Online Hearing – March 4, 2021 to October 14, 2021
REASONS FOR DECISION
A. INTRODUCTION
1The Condominium Authority Tribunal ("CAT") made an order, dated March 30, 2021, that cases 2020-00381N, 2020-00403N, 2021-00077R be heard together, pursuant to Rule 16.2 of the CAT Rules of Practice.
2I note that, during the hearing of these cases, YCC 274 brought motions stating that the Applicant's applications in these and other CAT proceedings were vexatious and should be dismissed. On July 27, 2021, CAT Chair Ian Darling issued a motion order finding that there were not sufficient grounds to grant YCC 274's motion to declare the Applicant's behaviour vexatious.1
3This case relates to the enforcement of those provisions of the York Condominium Corporation No. 274's "Rules and Regulations - 2004" that govern pets ("Pet Rules") and parking ("Parking Rules"). It also concerns a records request for a grounds map referred to in Rule 12(9) ("Grounds Map").
4The Applicant, Ney Calderon, is a unit owner in York Condominium Corporation No. 274 ("YCC 274"). Mr. Calderon asserts that YCC 274's Board of Directors ("Board") has allowed some individuals to park in the visitors' parking spaces without repercussions but has targeted him and other residents by enforcing the parking rules against them, and that it has failed to enforce its pet rules by allowing owners to walk with their pets on common element areas near his unit. He has also made a record request for the Grounds Map. Mr. Calderon seeks an order requiring the Condominium to pay a penalty under s. 1.44(6) of the Condominium Act, 1998 (the "Act") and requests an award of costs.
5YCC 274 states that it has used its discretion to enforce the rules appropriately, it did not refuse to provide a copy of the Grounds Map, and it provided a version of the Grounds Map at its first opportunity after it was found. It is YCC 274's position that Mr. Calderon brought these applications to further his argument that YCC 274, which became self-managed in 2019, should hire a professional management company. YCC 274 also requests a costs award.
6For the reasons set out below, I find that: Mr. Calderon has not provided sufficient evidence to establish that YCC 274 did not enforce its Pet Rules and Parking Rules in a consistent, fair, and reasonable manner; YCC 274 did not refuse to provide the Grounds Map to Mr. Calderon and provided it as soon as it located what appeared to be the requested record; YCC 274 has not refused to provide a record without a reasonable excuse, so a penalty is not warranted; and neither party is entitled to an award of costs.
B. ISSUES & ANALYSIS
Issue 1: Has YCC 274 enforced its Pet Rules and Parking Rules in a consistent, fair, and reasonable manner?
Relevant Pet Rules and Parking Rules
7The