Ontario « Jurisdictions

Niagara North Condominium Corporation No. 125 v. Waddington

After landlord unsuccessful in attempt to enforce “no-pets” provision in declaration, condominium corporation was denied right to bring its own application against tenant

Jurisdiction: Ontario 2005 Part 13 - 01/02/2006

York Region Condominium Corporation No. 968 v. Schickendanz Bros. Ltd.

Clause purporting to delay common expenses not valid

Jurisdiction: Ontario 2005 Part 13 - 01/02/2006

Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 949 v. Staib [Ontario Court of Appeal]

“No pets” provision in declaration not enforced where condominium corporation has been too slow in taking enforcement action

Jurisdiction: Ontario 2005 Part 14 - 01/05/2006

Metropolitan Condominium Corporation No. 949 v. Staib [See Condo Cases Across Canada, Part 13 (February 2006)] (November 25, 2005 Ontario Court of Appeal)

Supreme Court of Canada refuses leave to appeal In this case, the Trial Court had declined to enforce a “No Pets” provision in a declaration in circumstances where the condominium corporation was deemed have been aware of the presence of a cat in a unit, but was too slow in taking steps to require the cat’s removal. The decision was upheld by the Ontario Court of Appeal. The condominium corporation then sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. Leave to appeal was refused by the Supreme Court of Canada in April 2006, with costs awarded to the owner. Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 949 v. Staib (Appeal).pdf

Jurisdiction: Ontario 2005