27/11/2025– Jurisdiction Ontario
Part 92 published on 01/12/2025
Corporation’s Rules respecting use of Visitors Parking held to be valid, apart from certain “policies” adopted by the Board. Certain chargebacks levied by the Corporation were invalid.
The owner challenged the validity and enforcement of visitor parking provisions in the corporation’s governing documents and sought reimbursement for chargebacks related to alleged parking violations. She also claimed harassment by board members.
The Tribunal found that Article 3.4 of the Declaration and Rule 12 of the Rules governing visitor parking were valid and enforceable, but policies adopted after October 2023 that purported to modify Rule 12 were unenforceable because they did not comply with section 58 of the Condominium Act. The Tribunal said:
…I am in total agreement with the decision of this Tribunal in the Zolis case to the effect that “a condominium cannot alter its rules by making policies. If a board wishes to change its rules, it must do so in the manner set out in s. 58 of the Act.” (Zolis, at paragraph 34). I therefore find that the various policies put forward by WCECC 519 since October 12, 2023, are unenforceable to the extent that they propose to modify the contents of Rule 12, without regard for the requirements to amend the rules which are set out in the Act.
The Tribunal determined that several chargebacks issued before and shortly after Rule 12 came into force were invalid due to lack of clarity or supporting documentation, while a later chargeback for legal fees related to enforcement under Rule 12 was valid.
Allegations of harassment were dismissed as outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. The Tribunal said:
In my view, WCECC 519’s governing documents make no provision for a claim of this nature. In addition, the Applicant has made claims of suffering mental anguish and distress, without evidence. Whether or not she has experienced any such distress, her claims fall within the ambit of s. 117(1) of the Act and are therefore outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. As a result, the Applicant’s claims under this heading must fail.
Marazzato v. Wentworth Common Elements Condominium Corporation No. 519, 2025 ONCAT 173