Condominium Authority Tribunal
Date: October 6, 2025
Case: 2025-00575N
Citation: Kabir v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2697, 2025 ONCAT 169
Order under section 1.41 of the Condominium Act, 1998.
Member: Ian Darling, Chair
The Applicant: Shaffer Kabir, Self Represented.
The Respondent: Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2697, Represented by Maria Dimakas, Counsel
Submission Dates: September 25, 2025 to October 6, 2025
Dismissal Order
1This order explains why the case is dismissed following a motion to dismiss the case filed by the Respondent.
2An incident occurred on June 30, 2025 where the Respondent’s tenant moved into the unit. A compliance letter (dated July 7) outlined a number of safety concerns, and rule violations related to the incident – including rules related to booking elevators and notifying the condominium corporation regarding the tenants.
3The parties engaged in further communication (through legal counsel) in July that also added to the costs incurred.
4The original application related to a variety of chargebacks stemming from the original compliance letter dated July 7, 2025. The Tribunal has the authority to decide disputes related to indemnity provisions and chargebacks – but only for issues that fall within the jurisdiction. At the commencement of the Mediation, the Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the case because the chargebacks were related to behaviour that violated s. 117 (1) of the Condominium Act, 1998 (the “Act”), and other rules that do not fall within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.
5After reviewing the Respondent’s motion to dismiss, and the Applicant’s reply, I am satisfied that the case should be dismissed. The issues in dispute relate to a safety issue that was created when a tenant moved into the unit, and issues related to compliance with rules around tenants. The Tribunal cannot deal with the safety issues, as it does not have jurisdiction over s. 117 (1) of the Act. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to deal with issues around elevator use and notification regarding tenants.
6During the Mediation, the Applicant also contested that the Respondent had not provided records to demonstrate that the indemnity charges were reasonable. The Applicant submitted a formal records request on September 25, 2025. There is a specific process outlined in regulations for records requests and responses. If a dispute remains after the Respondent replies to the request, the Applicant may file a new records case with the Tribunal.
7The Applicant raised a number of concerns with the application of the legal charges. This decision makes no finding on the merit of those arguments because the issues that led to the charges are outside of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.
8I find that the issues that make up this dispute are not within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. Accordingly, I order that this case be dismissed.
Order
9The case is dismissed.
Ian Darling
Chair, Condominium Authority Tribunal
Released on: October 6, 2025