Condominium Authority Tribunal
Date: July 10, 2025 Case: 2025-00330N Citation: Naderi, Akbari v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2763, 2025 ONCAT 117
Order under section 1.41 of the Condominium Act, 1998.
Member: Ian Darling, Chair
The Applicants: Nasim Naderi, Self-represented Alireza Akbari, Self-represented
The Respondent: Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2763
Submission Dates: May 21, 2025 to June 6, 2025
DISMISSAL ORDER
1An application was submitted to the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) on May 7, 2025. The application is dismissed under Rule 19.1 of the CAT’s Rules of Practice for the following reasons:
This application identifies that the dispute is about a chargeback from the condo corporation due to the actions of the Applicant’s tenant. The chargeback relates to:
a. Legal costs incurred when seeking the tenant’s compliance with the Noise rules; and
b. Increased costs to hire additional security “to ensure the safety of residents and staff” as a consequence of the tenant’s actions.
Although the Tribunal has jurisdiction over noise nuisance disputes and related chargebacks, subsection 1 (3) of Ontario Regulation 179/17 (“O. Reg. 179/17”) excludes “a dispute that is also with respect to subsection 117 (1) of the Act”.
Subsection 117 (1) of the Condominium Act, 1998 (the “Act”) states that:
No person shall, through an act or omission, cause a condition to exist or an activity to take place in a unit, the common elements or the assets, if any, of the corporation if the condition or the activity, as the case may be, is likely to damage the property or the assets or to cause an injury or an illness to an individual.
The Corporation’s enforcement letters framed the tenant’s activities as creating a risk consistent with subsection 117 (1) of the Act.
As mentioned in paragraph 11 of Rahman v. Peel Standard Condominium Corporation No. 779, 2021 ONCAT 1:
… a dispute in a case before this Tribunal should be viewed as “also with respect to section 117 of the Act,” where the considerations under that section cannot reasonably or easily be divorced from analysis of the dispute in question or, more particularly, where a correct determination of the central issues in dispute cannot be made without also addressing such considerations. …
The chargeback on this dispute and the rationale provided for it by the Respondent in the legal letter cannot reasonably or easily be separated from the safety issues cited in the same letter, which fall within subsection 117 (1) of the Act.
2The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss the Application. The Applicant did not respond to the Notice. They were warned that the Tribunal could make a decision if they did not respond.
3I find that the issues in this Application are not within the jurisdiction of the CAT. Accordingly, I order that this case be dismissed.
ORDER
4The Tribunal orders the case dismissed.
Ian Darling Chair, Condominium Authority Tribunal
Released on: July 10, 2025