Sarah Elizabeth Colquhoun

A housing co-operative applied for a writ of possession following termination of a member’s membership and occupancy rights for permitting a non-member partner to reside in the unit beyond the permitted period.

The respondent, who had disabilities and relied on assistance from her partner, argued that eviction was unreasonable and discriminatory.

The court reviewed the board’s decision under a reasonableness standard and found the board relied on irrelevant prior complaints and failed to properly consider the partner’s membership application.

The evidence did not support concerns about misconduct, overcrowding, or funding risk.

Relief from forfeiture was granted and the writ of possession refused.

The applicant housing co‑operative sought termination of a member’s membership and occupancy rights following complaints regarding smoking in hallways and smoke affecting other tenants.

The co‑operative’s board had previously warned the member that eviction could follow further complaints but later voted to terminate membership at a meeting held without providing the statutory notice required under s. 178(2)3 of the Co‑Operative Corporations Act.

The court held that the earlier warning letter did not constitute adequate notice of the later board meeting nearly three years later.

It also rejected the argument that the member had agreed to voluntarily relinquish her membership and tenancy during settlement negotiations.

The application to enforce the eviction and termination of membership was dismissed.