top of page
White Columns
< Back

Kai Sin Yeung v Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 1136 - 2019 ONCAT 11 - 2019-05-13

Corporation:

KSYMTCC 1136

Date:

2019-05-24

Under:

CAT Decisions - Decision
Access to Records
Adequacy of Records
Entitlement to Records
Fees, Costs, Penalties
Records Retention

Summary:

In this case, Kai Sin Yeung, a unit owner of Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No 1136 (MTCC 1136), requested email correspondence related to the renewal of a gas contract. The applicant also sought a penalty and costs for the respondent's failure to reply to the request for records within 30 days. The respondent claims that the emails do not exist and that even if they did, the applicant would not be entitled to them. After reviewing the evidence, the tribunal found that the emails, whether they existed or not, were not records that the applicant was entitled to under the Condominium Act. However, the tribunal awarded costs of $200 to the applicant for bringing the matter before the tribunal.

Verdict:

The case of Kai Sin Yeung v Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No 1136 emphasizes the importance of keeping adequate records and responding to a request for records within the required 30-day period. The decision highlights that email correspondence, even if it is referenced in meeting minutes, may not necessarily be considered a record under the Condominium Act. Another important takeaway is that the Condominium Authority Tribunal may award costs to the applicant even if they are not entitled to the requested records.


Takeaways:

Email correspondence not considered as records: The tribunal determined that the email correspondence requested by the applicant in relation to the renewal of a gas contract were not records that the applicant was entitled to under the Condominium Act. The respondent argued that the emails did not exist, but even if they did, the applicant would not be entitled to them.

Failure to reply to a request for records: The respondent, Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No 1136, admitted to not replying to the applicant's request for records within the required 30-day period. The respondent claimed that it was an unintentional oversight as the corporation was transitioning between property managers at the time.

Applicant awarded costs: Despite the tribunal determining that the applicant was not entitled to the requested emails, they were still awarded costs for bringing the matter before the Condominium Authority Tribunal. The respondent was ordered to pay costs of $200 to the applicant.

Recommendations: 

Keep accurate and adequate records: Condominium corporations should ensure that they keep accurate and adequate records of all business transactions, decisions, and meetings in compliance with the Condominium Act. Inadequate records can lead to disputes and legal proceedings initiated by unit owners.

Respond to requests for records within the required timeframe: Condominium corporations must respond to a request for records within the required 30-day period. Failure to do so can lead to penalties and costs awarded to unit owners. It is important to have a clear record-keeping system to ensure that all requests are promptly addressed.

Ensure transparency and communication: Condominium corporations should aim to promote transparency and effective communication with unit owners. This can include providing regular updates on corporation business, decisions, and upcoming meetings. By providing clear and consistent communication, condominium corporations can reduce the chances of disputes and improve relationships with unit owners.

bottom of page