Eleanor White

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

After requesting to move the file to the tribunal decision stage, the applicant failed to pay the required fee by the deadline.

The tribunal dismissed the application as abandoned pursuant to Rule 34.3 of the Rules of Practice.

The applicant filed an application with the Condominium Authority Tribunal seeking video recordings and transcripts of board meeting minutes.

The tribunal member brought a motion to dismiss the case at the mediation stage under Rule 34.3 of the CAT's Rules of Practice.

The tribunal found that the requested records were not prescribed by the Condominium Act, belonged to a contracted note-taking service, and that the respondent had already provided the approved minutes.

The application was dismissed as the issues were deemed so minor that it would be unfair to require the respondent to proceed.

The applicant filed an application with the Condominium Authority Tribunal after the respondent condominium corporation denied certain requests for records relating to site work on the common elements.

During the mediation stage, the tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss, finding that the respondent's denials were reasonable because the requested items were either ambiguous or did not exist.

The tribunal concluded that the respondent had discharged its duty under the Condominium Act and dismissed the application without proceeding to a full hearing.

The applicants filed an application with the Condominium Authority Tribunal that proceeded to mediation.

After mediation failed to result in a settlement, the primary applicant was given the opportunity to move the matter to a tribunal decision.

The applicant failed to pay the required fee to advance the case within the 15-day period.

Consequently, the Tribunal ordered the case closed pursuant to Rule 34.3 of the CAT's Rules of Practice.

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

The applicant subsequently informed the Tribunal that they wished to withdraw their case.

The Tribunal accepted the withdrawal and ordered the case closed under Rule 43.1 of the CAT's Rules of Practice.

The applicants filed an application with the Condominium Authority Tribunal which proceeded to Stage 2 mediation.

The applicants subsequently informed the Tribunal that they wished to withdraw their case.

The Tribunal accepted the withdrawal and ordered the case closed pursuant to Rule 34.3 of the CAT's Rules of Practice.

The applicant condominium corporation filed an application against a unit owner regarding a dog in the unit, which allegedly violated the condominium's rules.

During the proceedings, it was discovered that the named respondent owner had been deceased for nine years and the unit was occupied by a tenant who had not been properly added as an intervenor.

The Tribunal dismissed the application under Rule 4 of its Rules of Practice, directing the applicant to confirm the current owners and properly add the tenant as a party before refiling.

The applicant condominium owner requested an unredacted copy of a contract between the condominium corporation and a plumbing contractor for a Kitec piping replacement project, including suite-type designs.

The respondent corporation provided a heavily redacted contract, incorrectly relying on section 55(4)(c) of the Condominium Act, 1998, claiming the suite-type designs related to specific units.

The Condominium Authority Tribunal found the redactions were improper as suite-types represent multiple units and do not identify specific owners.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to provide the unredacted contract and awarded a $500 penalty plus $200 in costs against the respondent for effectively refusing the records without reasonable excuse.

The applicant condominium corporation brought an application against a unit owner for harassing staff and management and for failing to comply with a new pet rule regarding building entry and exit.

The Tribunal found that the respondent's pattern of abusive emails constituted an annoyance and disruption under the Condominium Act regulations, violating the corporation's harassment rule.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to cease all abusive communications, comply with the pet rule, and pay $1,200 in costs.

The applicant condominium corporation filed an application against the respondent unit owner for breaching the corporation's non-smoking rule and creating a nuisance through smoke and odour migration.

The respondent initially failed to participate but later joined the written hearing, claiming she had ceased smoking on the grounds.

The Tribunal found that the respondent and her guests breached the non-smoking rule and section 117(2) of the Condominium Act, 1998.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to cease smoking or vaping in her unit and on the common elements, and awarded the applicant its pre-tribunal enforcement costs, filing fees, and a portion of its legal costs.

The applicant filed an application with the Condominium Authority Tribunal to obtain specific records from the respondent condominium corporation.

During the mediation stage, the applicant sold her unit.

The Tribunal found that under section 55(3) of the Condominium Act, 1998, the applicant lost her entitlement to the records and standing in the process upon the sale of the unit.

The application was dismissed without costs.