The applicant unit owner sought an oppression remedy against the respondent condominium corporation under s. 135 of the Condominium Act, alleging that the corporation failed to adequately address ongoing water leaks in her unit, committed unauthorized entries, and acted abusively.
The court found that while the corporation's communication was deficient and it committed one unlawful entry, it had fulfilled its duty to maintain and repair the common elements by conducting extensive investigations and repairs.
The court concluded that the corporation's conduct, viewed in context, was not harsh, vindictive, or oppressive.
The application was dismissed.
