Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Choose your role:
Harrison v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2714 - 2021 ONCAT 55 - 2021-06-23
Corporation:
HTSCC 2714
Date:
2021-06-23
Summary:
the case Harrison v Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No 2714 involved a request to enforce settlement agreements related to records. The Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) found that the respondent failed to provide certain records, including cancelled cheques and general ledgers, as required by the settlement agreements. However, the CAT determined that the cheque stubs provided as an alternative by the respondent were reasonable. The CAT also concluded that the September 2020 financial statements fulfilled the agreement's requirement for general ledgers. The parties had merged two settlement agreement cases in this hearing, and the CAT ordered the respondent to provide the outstanding records. The case highlights the importance of compliance with settlement agreements and the duty to provide adequate records requested under the Condominium Act.
Under:
CAT Decisions - Decision
Adequacy of Records
Compliance with Settlement Agreement
Entitlement to Records
Verdict:
The case Harrison v Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No 2714 highlights the importance of compliance with settlement agreements and the duty to provide adequate records requested under the Condominium Act. It also demonstrates that the Condominium Authority Tribunal has the power to issue orders to enforce compliance with settlement agreements, and that alternative evidence, such as cheque stubs and financial statements, may be accepted as reasonable substitutes for requested records.
Takeaways:
This Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) case dealt with a request to enforce two separate settlement agreements regarding records issues.
The Tribunal concluded that the Respondent failed to provide two types of records under one of the agreements and ordered the Respondent to provide them. However, the Tribunal found that the Respondent complied with the remaining elements of both agreements.
Settlement agreement cases are different from most CAT records cases; the parties in a dispute agree to settle and capture the terms in a binding agreement.
In settlement agreement cases, the CAT has to decide whether the parties have complied with the settlement agreement, and if one or both of the parties have not complied with the agreement, the CAT determines if and how the Tribunal can enforce compliance through an order.
In this case, the Applicant and the Respondent agreed to work together to address future requests for records through respectful and appropriate communication, and the Respondent agreed to respond to the Applicant within 30 days and provide the Applicant with records they are entitled to.
Recommendations:
Clear Communication: It is crucial for both parties to maintain open and clear communication throughout the settlement agreement process. This includes notifying the other party if there are any challenges or difficulties in meeting specific terms of the agreement. Adequate communication can help avoid misunderstandings and create a more transparent resolution process.
Thorough Documentation: Parties should ensure that settlement agreements accurately capture the terms and obligations of both parties. It is important to clearly specify the records to be provided and their adequacy, as well as any alternative substitutes that may be acceptable. Thorough documentation will help prevent disputes and confusion in the future.
Compliance Verification: Parties should carefully review whether the other party has fully complied with the settlement agreement. If there are concerns or discrepancies, it is advisable to gather evidence and provide clear documentation of the alleged non-compliance. This will help support any future actions or requests for enforcement orders, if necessary.