Condominium Authority Tribunal
Date: December 1, 2025 Case: 2025-00743SA Citation: Munton v. Halton Condominium Corporation No. 250, 2025 ONCAT 199
Order under section 1.41 of the Condominium Act, 1998.
Member: Ian Darling, Chair
The Applicant: Robert Munton, Self-Represented
The Respondent: Halton Condominium Corporation No. 250
Motion Process Dates: October 17, 2025, to November 7, 2025
DISMISSAL ORDER
1This Settlement Agreement application was submitted seeking an order that the Respondent comply with terms of a Settlement Agreement dated October 30, 2024, for CAT case 2024-00516R.
2This application is dismissed under Rule 19.1 of the CAT’s Rules of Practice for the following reasons:
- The Applicant alleged that the Respondent did not comply with several terms of the Agreement. The Tribunal identified several concerns with the alleged non-compliance.
Clause 6:
“Failure to distribute the November 8, 2024, Reserve Fund Study to all Owners together with the required plain-language synopsis”.
Paragraph 6 of the Settlement Agreement does not state a “plain-language synopsis” is required.
Clause 8:
“Attempts to impose attendance restrictions (“by invitation only”) on Board meetings, contrary to the Settlement requirement for unconditional access.”
Paragraph 8 of the Settlement Agreement states that “the Applicant can request to attend and meet with the Board…”. While the Applicant is entitled to make such requests, this term does not require the Board to agree.
Clause 9:
“Continued failure to provide core and non-core records within the timeframes required by the Condominium Act, 1998 and as reaffirmed in the Settlement.”
Paragraph 9 of the Settlement Agreement outlines all records that were provided and settled at the date of this Agreement. It does not apply to future records.
Alleged violation that was not associated with a specific term:
A director of the Respondent condominium corporation has yet to complete his director training with the deadline of October 30, 2025.
There is no term in the Settlement Agreement with respect to director training.
Although the Applicant listed concerns with the agreement, they did not identify any terms of the Agreement that were violated.
Furthermore, paragraph 11 of the Settlement Agreement states that if any Party fails to comply with the Settlement Agreement, any other Party can file a case with the CAT requesting an order for compliance within six months of a party’s failure to comply. Case 2024-00516R was closed via Settlement Agreement on October 30, 2024, and this application was filed October 9, 2025. This exceeds the six-month timeframe to file.
3The Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Dismiss the case. The Applicant responded to the Notice. The Applicant asserts that the Respondent has not met the terms, but these concerns with how the corporation is operating are not related to specific terms in the agreement. Therefore, they do not meet the requirements for the CAT to accept the application.
4In the submission, the Applicants identified that they submitted records requests on May 28, 2025, and July 14, 2025. They stated that the corporation did not respond to the requests. Although the agreement contains a term that affirmed the corporation’s obligations to follow the Act, this is a general reassertion of the requirement to follow the act, rather than a settlement term. These are new and distinct records requests. It would be unfair to provide a direct access to Stage 3 – Tribunal Decision for these cases without allowing for informal and lower cost options.
5Therefore, because the Applicant did not identify any terms of the Settlement Agreement that were violated, and because the application was brought to the Tribunal past the six-month time frame to file, I order that this application be dismissed.
ORDER
6The Tribunal orders the application dismissed.
Ian Darling, Chair, Condominium Authority Tribunal
Released on: December 1, 2025