Deborah Anschell

The applicant filed an application with the Condominium Authority Tribunal which proceeded to the mediation stage.

The applicant failed to participate in the mediation despite repeated requests and did not respond to a Notice of Intent to Dismiss.

The Tribunal found the case had been abandoned and ordered it dismissed pursuant to Rule 32.3 of the CAT's Rules of Practice.

The applicant, a condominium unit owner, requested records of owners, mortgagees, and leases from the respondent condominium corporation.

The respondent agreed to provide the records at mediation but had delayed production by almost two months due to the property manager's inadvertence.

The Condominium Authority Tribunal found the delay was equivalent to a refusal without reasonable excuse and ordered the respondent to pay a $250 penalty and $200 in costs for filing fees.

The tribunal declined to order the respondent to provide a written apology letter.

The applicant brought a motion to correct or clarify a previous order that dismissed his application for condominium records.

The applicant argued the previous decision wrongly interpreted evidence and was unfair.

The Tribunal held that Rule 30 of its Rules of Practice only permits corrections of typographical, calculation, or similar minor errors, and does not grant jurisdiction to reconsider substantive findings or weigh evidence anew.

The motion was denied for lack of jurisdiction.

The applicant, a former unit owner, applied to the Condominium Authority Tribunal for an order directing the respondent condominium corporation to provide electronic copies of certain records.

During the proceedings, the applicant sold his unit.

The respondent brought a motion to dismiss the application on the basis that the applicant was no longer entitled to obtain records under the Condominium Act, 1998.

The Tribunal granted the motion, finding that the applicant lost standing when he sold his unit, and that a subsequent agency agreement from another owner only authorized examination, not obtaining copies.

The applicant unit owner brought a matter before the Condominium Authority Tribunal alleging that the respondent condominium corporation failed to comply with a settlement agreement regarding a records request.

The applicant sought outstanding invoices related to building maintenance and a penalty for non-compliance.

The Tribunal found that the respondent had made best efforts to comply, providing the majority of records by the deadline and the remainder shortly after the condominium president returned from vacation.

The Tribunal concluded that the respondent had not contravened the settlement agreement and declined to award costs.