Rachel Fielding

The applicant condominium corporation filed an application with the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) seeking to enforce its pet rules, specifically requiring the respondent's accommodated large service dog to wear a muzzle in common areas.

The respondent brought a motion to defer the CAT application, arguing they had already filed a human rights application with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) regarding the same dispute.

The CAT dismissed the motion to defer, finding it has exclusive jurisdiction over disputes regarding the application of condominium rules governing pets, and that the CAT application should proceed.

The applicant condominium owner requested copies of board meeting minutes from the respondent condominium corporation.

The respondent provided some minutes but missed others due to a change in property management companies and administrative oversight.

The applicant sought a penalty against the respondent for refusing to provide the records without reasonable excuse.

The Condominium Authority Tribunal found that the respondent did not intentionally withhold the records and that the failure was due to administrative oversight.

The request for a penalty was dismissed, but the applicant was awarded $210 in costs for the earlier stages of the proceeding.

The applicant, a condominium unit owner, requested financial statements and legal fee invoices from the respondent condominium corporation.

After the respondent provided redacted invoices that the applicant initially found unsatisfactory, the respondent clarified the documents during the tribunal proceeding.

The applicant confirmed satisfaction with the records provided.

The tribunal ordered the case closed and directed the respondent to pay the applicant's $150 filing fee as costs, with a provision for a common expense credit if unpaid.

The applicant, a unit owner and former director, requested condominium records including the Record of Owners and Mortgagees and a policy on liens and arrears.

The applicant alleged the owners' list was inaccurate and the policy provided was incomplete.

The Tribunal found no evidence that the condominium corporation failed to maintain the owners' list accurately or failed to provide the correct policy.

However, because the condominium corporation delayed providing the owners' list beyond the 30-day statutory timeline, the Tribunal awarded a nominal penalty of $75 against the respondent.

The applicant and the respondent reached an agreement to settle a dispute regarding a request for condominium records.

The parties requested that their agreement be incorporated into a Consent Order.

The Tribunal issued the Consent Order, which required the applicant to pay a labour fee of $30 per hour, up to an estimated $900, for the production of the requested records, and required the respondent to produce the records and refund any difference if the actual labour time was less than estimated.