Lazar Ilic

The applicant condominium corporation brought a motion to evict the respondent unit owner and force the sale of his unit, alleging he breached a prior Compliance Order and the Condominium Act, 1998.

The applicant relied on evidence from its security manager regarding the respondent's verbal altercations with staff and social media posts.

The court found the applicant's evidence to be largely inadmissible hearsay and highly prejudicial.

While the respondent's behaviour was rude and obnoxious, it did not constitute a breach of the Act or contempt of the Compliance Order.

The motion was dismissed without costs, subject to terms including the respondent's undertaking to vacate the unit until December 2025 and rent it out.

The applicant co-ownership corporation sought various orders against a co-owner for denying access to his unit for routine smoke alarm inspections, alleging breach of the co-ownership agreement.

The respondent, a self-represented litigant, argued that proper notice was not given.

The court found that the respondent breached the agreement on one occasion (2021) and for failing to arrange his own inspection in 2020, but also found that the corporation failed to provide proper notice in 2019 and 2020.

The court granted a specific permanent injunction requiring the respondent to provide access upon reasonable notice (10 days written notice, specifying a two-hour window), but denied the corporation's requests for broader injunctions, permission to serve by email, and full indemnity costs, finding success was divided.

The Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2581 applied for various orders against a unit owner, Giovanni Paterno, due to his disruptive, aggressive, and non-compliant behaviour, including breaches of the Condominium Act, the condominium's declaration and rules, and workplace violence policies.

The Corporation sought declarations of breach, an order to vacate, and a forced sale of his unit, along with damages and costs.

The court found Paterno in breach of the Act and condominium rules due to his substance abuse-related misconduct, property damage, and harassment of staff and residents.

While acknowledging his remorse and efforts, the court deemed an immediate eviction too harsh.

Instead, it issued a conditional order: declarations of breach, orders for compliance, payment for damages and costs, and a conditional eviction/sale order to be triggered upon any future breach of the court's order.