top of page
White Columns
< Back

Datri v. York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1188 - 2021 ONCAT 47 - 2021-05-20






In the case of Datri v. York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1188, the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) issued a dismissal order because it lacked the legal authority to address the dispute. The Applicant who was a board member of York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1188 (YRSCC 1188), brought a case against York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1191 (YRSCC 1191) regarding visitor parking rule changes that she claimed were made without proper procedures. YRSCC 1191 argued that the CAT lacked jurisdiction as the applicanti was not an owner in YRSCC 1191. The CAT concluded that the dispute was between two condominium corporations and that Anna Datri was advocating for her corporation, not as an individual owner. As such, the CAT did not have the authority to decide this case, and it was dismissed under CAT Rule 17. The case underscores the importance of jurisdictional boundaries in condominium disputes.


CAT Decisions - Dismissal Order
Parking and Storage
Procedural Issue with Governing Documents


In the case of Datri v. York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1188, the CAT dismissed the case due to jurisdictional limitations. The key lesson is that the CAT has specific jurisdiction, and it cannot adjudicate disputes between condominium corporations or individuals who are not owners in the condominium involved in the dispute. It underscores the importance of understanding the CAT's authority when choosing it as a forum for dispute resolution.


Jurisdictional Boundaries: This case highlights the importance of understanding jurisdictional boundaries when it comes to condominium disputes. The CAT's authority is limited to resolving disputes involving owners, corporations, occupants, or mortgagees of a unit.

Dispute Between Corporations: The CAT clarified that it does not have the power to adjudicate disputes between two condominium corporations. In this case, the dispute was between York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1188 and York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1191, making it beyond the CAT's jurisdiction.

Individual vs. Corporate Representation: The CAT emphasized that an individual, even if they are an owner in one of the corporations, cannot bring a case against another corporation unless they have a specific dispute with that corporation. In this instance, the Applicant was advocating for her corporation's position and was not a party to a dispute with the other corporation.

Use of Dismissal Rule: The CAT utilized Rule 17(b) to dismiss the case, which allows for the dismissal of applications when the CAT lacks the legal authority to address the issues at hand.

Appropriate Forum: This case serves as a reminder that choosing the appropriate forum for dispute resolution is crucial, and the CAT may not always be the right venue for certain condominium-related disputes.


Understand Jurisdiction: Before filing a case with the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) or any other legal body, it's crucial to understand the jurisdiction of the tribunal. Ensure that the dispute falls within their scope and authority to avoid potential dismissals.

Correct Identification of Parties: Carefully identify the parties involved in a dispute, ensuring that they have the legal standing to bring the case forward. In this case, the CAT emphasized that only owners of condominium units could bring disputes before them, not individuals or corporations who were not owners in the specific condominium in question.

Consider Alternative Dispute Resolution: If the CAT is not the appropriate forum for a particular dispute, consider alternative dispute resolution methods such as private mediation or arbitration, or taking the matter to the courts if necessary. Understanding the right forum for your case is essential to a successful resolution.

bottom of page