Emily Yu Meng Deng

The applicant condominium corporation sought relief against a unit owner for alleged breaches of the Condominium Act, the corporation's Declaration, and its Rules.

The breaches alleged included harassment of board members and contractors, failure to maintain an exclusive-use yard in compliance with governing rules, and refusal to permit access to a common element (sump pump) located within the unit.

The court found that the respondent breached sections 19, 117, and 119 of the Condominium Act, the Declaration, and the Rules.

The court granted declaratory relief and orders requiring the respondent to permit access to the yard for maintenance and to cease harassing and threatening communications.

The court adjourned the determination of compensatory relief and costs pending further submissions.

Following a successful motion for a compliance order against a unit owner and his tenant son, the applicant condominium corporation sought costs on a full indemnity scale.

The court found the applicant was presumptively entitled to costs and that the condominium's governing documents and the Condominium Act supported a full indemnity award to prevent other owners from subsidizing the enforcement.

The court reviewed the fees and disbursements, made minor reductions for duplication and unrelated work, and fixed costs at $15,916.49, to be added to the common expenses for the subject unit.

The applicant condominium corporation sought compliance orders against a unit owner and his tenant for repeated breaches of the Condominium Act and governing documents, including property damage, drug use, and nuisance.

The court found the tenant's behavior constituted breaches and granted the compliance order, converting the application hearing into a motion for efficiency.

The court also granted leave for the corporation to bring a future motion for eviction if breaches continue, while addressing the tenant's capacity concerns.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Condominium Authority Tribunal regarding four requests for condominium records under section 55 of the Condominium Act.

The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant failed to identify any error of law, as required by section 1.46(2) of the Act, and instead challenged findings of fact and mixed fact and law.

The court upheld the Tribunal's findings that there was no refusal to provide records without reasonable excuse and awarded partial indemnity costs of $8,500 to the respondent.