Madeleine Stirland

The applicant condominium corporation brought an application against the unit owners and their tenant regarding unreasonable noise.

The tenant did not participate in the hearing.

The participating parties agreed that the tenant caused unreasonable noise and that the owners had commenced eviction proceedings at the Landlord and Tenant Board.

The Tribunal ordered the tenant to cease creating unreasonable noise and ordered the unit owners to pay $2,000 in costs to the condominium corporation.

The applicant condominium corporation applied to the Condominium Authority Tribunal regarding unreasonable odours emanating from the respondent owner's unit due to hoarding and garbage accumulation.

The respondent did not participate in the hearing.

The Tribunal found that the respondent's activities constituted a nuisance under s. 117(2) of the Condominium Act, 1998.

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to clean the unit within 30 days, failing which the corporation may enter and hire a third-party cleaner at the respondent's expense.

The corporation was also awarded $750 in compensation and $1,200 in costs.

The applicant condominium corporation sought an order requiring the respondent unit owners and resident to comply with its non-smoking rule and s. 117(2)(b) of the Condominium Act, 1998, following repeated complaints of cannabis smoke and odour.

Despite multiple warnings and legal compliance letters, the nuisance continued.

The respondents did not participate in the hearing.

The Tribunal found the respondents in breach of the governing documents and the Act, ordered them to immediately cease smoking on the premises, and awarded the applicant $3,876.87 in pre-litigation enforcement damages and $1,395.03 in legal costs.

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

The applicant was given the opportunity to move the case to the tribunal decision stage but failed to pay the required fee within 15 days.

Consequently, the tribunal ordered the case closed in the mediation stage pursuant to Rule 34.3 of the Rules of Practice.