top of page
White Columns
< Back

Fernandes v. York Condominium Corporation No. 50 - 2022 ONCAT 76 - 2022-06-10






In the case of Fernandes v. York Condominium Corporation No. 50 (2022 ONCAT 76), two applications were submitted to the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) by the applicants. The first case (CAT #2022-00347R) pertained to condominium record disputes, while the second case (CAT #2022-00349N) concerned noise nuisances. The CAT proposed to join these applications into a single case due to their interrelated nature, involving the same parties and representing potential cost and time savings. The Respondent did not respond to the motion, and considering the relevant factors, including intertwined issues and parties, the CAT ordered the cases to be merged. CAT Case #2022-00347R was closed, and all proceedings continued under CAT Case #2022-00349N, allowing for the efficient resolution of the disputes.


CAT Decisions - Motion Order
Access to Records


In the case of Fernandes v. York Condominium Corporation No. 50, the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) allowed the consolidation of two related cases, one concerning condominium record disputes and the other related to noise nuisances, into a single case. This decision was based on the interrelated nature of the issues, the common parties involved, and the potential for increased efficiency and cost savings in handling them together. The CAT's flexibility in merging cases demonstrates its commitment to ensuring a fair and streamlined resolution process for related disputes.


Consolidation of Cases: The Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) allowed two separate cases, one related to condominium record disputes and the other concerning noise nuisances, to be consolidated into a single case under section 1.37(2) of the Condominium Act, 1998. This consolidation was deemed appropriate due to the interrelated nature of the issues.

Relevant Factors: The decision considered various factors from 1014864 Ontario Ltd. v. 1721789 Ontario Inc. to determine whether consolidating proceedings was in the balance of convenience. These factors included the extent of issue interweaving, overlap of evidence and witnesses, parties involved, legal representation, timing, and potential cost savings.

Interconnected Issues: The CAT found that the issues in the two cases were intertwined, with records requested in one case directly related to the noise incidents in the other.

Efficiency and Cost Savings: Combining the cases was expected to increase efficiency and potentially reduce costs by avoiding duplicate procedures and proceedings.

Fairness in Consolidation: The CAT utilized its authority to merge cases when it believed it would be fair to determine the issues together, demonstrating flexibility in handling related disputes.


Consider Case Interrelation: When facing multiple related cases or disputes, it is advisable to consider the degree to which the issues in each case are interwoven. If there is significant overlap or interrelation between the cases, as seen in Fernandes v. York Condominium Corporation No. 50, it may be in the parties' and the tribunal's best interest to consolidate them into a single case for efficiency.

Examine the Common Elements: Pay close attention to common elements such as parties, legal representation, and the timing of case submissions. In this case, the fact that both applications had the same parties and were submitted on the same date played a crucial role in the decision to merge them. Common elements can be key factors when deciding whether to consolidate cases.

Consider Cost and Time Efficiency: Evaluate the potential cost and time implications of hearing cases separately versus together. If consolidating cases is likely to streamline the resolution process, save costs, and reduce delays, as in this case, it is a favorable option. Ensuring that the most efficient method is chosen can benefit all parties involved in the legal proceedings.

bottom of page