A self-represented member of a housing co-operative sought an order appointing an inspector under the Co-Operative Corporations Act and a further order compelling compliance with the Act and the co-operative’s by-laws.
The court held that the evidence showed, at most, procedural errors and disagreements over governance rather than substantial evidence of intentional malfeasance or serious and continued mismanagement.
The court declined to intervene in the co-operative’s internal management, noting the absence of a practical proposal for the scope, funding, and administration of any inspection and the prior refusal of FSCO to appoint an inspector.
The application was dismissed with costs to the respondent.
