top of page
White Columns
< Back

Kong v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1959 - 2021 ONCAT 18 - 2021-03-04

Corporation:

KTSCC 1959

Date:

2021-03-04

Under:

CAT Decisions - Decision
Parking and Storage
Procedural Issue with Governing Documents
Vehicles

Summary:

The case involves a dispute between a condominium owner and two condominium corporations over the use of visitor parking and charging station facilities. The applicant sought permission to use the visitor parking area and its 120-volt wall outlets to charge her electric vehicle or alternatively, requested the installation of a 240-volt Electric Vehicle Charging Station. The condominium corporations denied the request, offering the option of installing an EVCS in the applicant's parking space at her expense. During the hearing, preliminary questions were raised about the jurisdiction of the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) to hear the application, and it was determined that the application was statute-barred as the dispute had already ended. The parties agreed that CAT had the jurisdiction to hear the matter of the applicant's use of the visitor parking area under the Condo Corporations' Declarations. The decision was set aside and remitted to CAT for determination of the remaining issues.

Verdict:

the quick verdict is that the application filed by the applicant against the Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1959 has been dismissed due to the expiration of the time limit for bringing the application. The lesson from this case is the importance of filing applications within the designated time frame to avoid dismissal based on statute-barred claims.

Takeaways:

The case involves a dispute between a condominium owner and two condominium corporations over the use of visitor parking and charging station facilities.
The applicant sought permission to use the visitor parking area and its 120-volt wall outlets to charge her electric vehicle and alternatively, requested the installation of a 240-volt Electric Vehicle Charging Station.
The Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) raised preliminary questions about its jurisdiction to hear the matter. It was determined that the application had expired as the dispute over the applicant's access to visitor parking had arisen on March 1, 2017, and the applicant filed her application on October 16, 2020.
The CAT granted the dismissal motion, making it unnecessary to determine the questions of the CAT’s jurisdiction.
The decision was set aside and remitted to CAT for determination of the remaining issues. The parties agreed that the CAT has jurisdiction to hear the matter of the applicant using the visitor parking area under the Condo Corporations' Declarations.

Recommendations: 

Explore alternative dispute resolution: Since the time limit for bringing the application has expired, it may be beneficial for the parties involved to consider alternative dispute resolution methods like mediation or negotiation. This can help reach a resolution outside of the formal legal process.

Seek legal advice: Given the complexity of the jurisdiction and remedies sought in the case, it is advisable for the applicant to consult with a legal professional. Seeking legal advice will provide a better understanding of her rights and options moving forward.

Review and understand the Condo Corporation's Declarations, By-Laws, and Rules: To determine the obligations of the Condo Corporations regarding the installation of the Electric Vehicle Charging Station (EVCS) and access to visitor parking, the applicant should carefully review and understand the relevant Condo Corporation documents. This will help her assess the feasibility of her claims and the likelihood of success in her application or potential future legal actions.

bottom of page