top of page
White Columns
< Back

Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 111 v. Lega - 2022 ONCAT 123 - 2022-11-16

Corporation:

CCC 111

Date:

2022-11-16

Under:

CAT Decisions - Decision
Compliance with Governing Documents
Indemnification or Compensation
Pets and Animals

Summary:

In the case of Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 111 v. Lega, a condominium corporation (CCC 111) filed a complaint against an owner, for violating the corporation's pet rules, specifically regarding the weight, registration, and control of his dog. The respondent did not participate in the proceedings, and the decision was based solely on CCC 111's evidence. The tribunal found that Lega had breached the pet rules, notably by failing to muzzle and control his dog, and ordered him to permanently remove the dog from the condominium's premises within 15 days. Lega was also directed to pay $450 as compensation for damages and $3,500 in costs to CCC 111 within 30 days.

Verdict:

In this case, the Condominium Authority Tribunal ordered the permanent removal of the respondent's dog from the premises of Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 111 due to his violations of the condominium's pet rules, including the dog's weight exceeding the limit, failure to register the dog, and not muzzling or controlling the dog on the common elements. The respondent was also ordered to pay $450 in compensation for damages to the condominium corporation and $3,500 in costs. It's recommended that individuals residing in condominiums should familiarize themselves with the condominium rules and promptly address any violations to avoid legal and financial consequences. Additionally, owners should cooperate with the condominium management and the tribunal to resolve disputes in a timely manner.

Takeaways:

Takeaways:

Condominium corporations have the authority to enforce pet rules, and owners are required to comply with these rules.
Failure to follow pet rules, such as leash and weight limits, can result in the removal of the pet from the premises.
Legal costs may be awarded if an owner's non-compliance leads to a tribunal hearing.
Owners should respond to communications from condominium corporations and address rule violations promptly.
Condominium corporations have a responsibility to ensure compliance with governing documents.

Recommendations: 

Compliance with Condominium Rules:
It's essential for all condominium owners to adhere to the rules, by-laws, and regulations established by the condominium corporation. This includes rules related to pets and animals. Owners should familiarize themselves with these governing documents when moving into a condominium.
When an owner receives notices or warnings regarding non-compliance with rules, it is in their best interest to respond promptly and take the necessary actions to comply. Ignoring such notices can lead to escalated legal actions, as demonstrated in this case.

Consequences of Non-Compliance:
This case illustrates that condominium boards have the authority to enforce their rules and take action against owners who do not comply. The board's decisions, if reasonable and in good faith, are typically given deference by the courts or tribunal.
Owners should be aware that if they fail to comply with condominium rules, they may be subject to penalties, costs, and even eviction from the premises, as ordered by the Tribunal in this case.

Financial Responsibility:
Owners who breach condominium rules may be held financially responsible for any costs incurred by the condominium corporation to address the violations. This includes legal fees, administrative costs, and other expenses associated with enforcing the rules.

In this case, the respondent was required to pay $450 as compensation for damages related to the costs incurred before the Tribunal application and $3,500 as a cost award for legal fees and Tribunal fees incurred during the proceeding.

Fairness and Reasonableness:
When it comes to awarding costs, the Tribunal will consider the reasonableness of legal fees. It may not award the full amount requested if the fees are found to be disproportionate to the complexity of the case.

bottom of page