top of page
White Columns
< Back

Mermut v. York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1381 et al. - 2023 ONCAT 93 - 2023-07-18

Corporation:

MYRSCC 1381

Date:

2023-07-18

Under:

CAT Decisions - Decision
Compliance with Governing Documents
Indemnification or Compensation
Noise
Procedural Issue with Governing Documents
Reasonableness and/or Consistency of Governing Documents
Vibration

Summary:

The Applicant alleges that the Respondent and the condominium corporation, York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1381 (YRSCC 1381), have failed to address unreasonable noise complaints that have been interfering with the Applicant's quiet enjoyment of their unit since August 2022. The Applicant seeks orders requiring YRSCC 1381 to enforce its governing documents and requiring and another respondent to comply with the same.

After considering the submissions from all parties, including respondent's contention that they have taken appropriate action in response to the noise complaints and YRSCC 1381's argument that the matter falls outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction, the Member ruled in favor of the Applicant. It was found that there is unreasonable noise originating from respondent's unit, which has not been sufficiently addressed respondent and the condominium corporation. The Member ordered costs, compensation, and the application filing fee to be paid by the respondent, YRSCC 1381, and the other respondent.

Verdict:

Verdict: The tribunal found in favor of the applicant determining that they experienced unreasonable noise from the unit above theirs and that the respondents failed to enforce the governing documents to address the noise issue.

Lesson: The case highlights the importance of enforcing governing documents in condominium corporations to maintain the quiet enjoyment of all unit owners and deal with issues such as unreasonable noise. It also emphasizes the jurisdiction of the Condominium Authority Tribunal in hearing disputes related to annoyance, nuisance, and disruption in accordance with the provisions of the Condominium Act.

Takeaways:

Based on the information provided, here are 3-5 key takeaways from the case of Mermut v. York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1381 et al:

Noise Complaints: The Applicant alleged that the Respondents were creating unreasonable noise that interfered with their quiet enjoyment of their unit. The Tribunal found that the Applicant had established that they experienced unreasonable noise transmitted from the repondent's unit.

Failure to Enforce Governing Documents: The Tribunal found that the respondent and York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1381 (YRSCC 1381) failed to enforce their governing documents, which prohibit owners, their families, and other occupants from creating unreasonable noise that constitutes a nuisance, annoyance, or disruption. The Tribunal determined that the unreasonable noise was permitted to continue due to this failure.

Jurisdiction of the Tribunal: The issue of whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the application was raised by YRSCC 1381, but the Tribunal concluded that it did have jurisdiction based on the allegations of unreasonable annoyance, nuisance, and disruption, as provided under Section 117(2) of the Condominium Act.

Relevance of Late Documents: YRSCC 1381 requested to file additional documents challenging the Applicant's evidence and establishing the Applicant's sensitivity to noise. However, the Tribunal denied the request to file late documents, considering that the request was made after the set deadline and could unfairly prejudice the other parties.

Compensation and Costs: The Tribunal ordered the respondent, YRSCC 1381, and the other respondent to pay the Applicant costs, compensation, and the application filing fee, recognizing the impact of the unreasonable noise and the failure to enforce the governing documents.

Recommendations: 

Addressing Unreasonable Noise: The applicant, Ozzy Mermut, alleged that the respondent condominium corporation, York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1381, failed to enforce its governing documents related to noise regulations. It is recommended that YRSCC 1381 take measures to effectively address and mitigate unreasonable noise within the condominium complex, as per their governing documents. This may include enforcing noise regulations, investigating noise complaints thoroughly, and taking appropriate action to minimize noise transmission between units.

Compliance with Governing Documents: The applicant's complaint also extends to the failure of the respondent corporation and the unit owner, Shagun Dhir, to comply with the corporation's governing documents. YRSCC 1381 should ensure that all unit owners and residents are aware of their obligations as outlined in the governing documents, and take necessary steps to enforce compliance. This can be achieved through clear communication, regular reminders, and enforcement measures for any breaches.

Timely and Responsive Complaint Handling: The case highlights the alleged failure of YRSCC 1381 and Dhir to adequately address the noise complaints raised by the applicant. It is recommended that the respondent corporation promptly and thoroughly investigate any noise complaints, take appropriate action, and maintain open lines of communication with all parties involved. Timely resolution of complaints can help mitigate conflicts and enhance the overall living experience for unit owners.

Understanding Jurisdiction: The case involves a dispute about the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear the application. It is important for both condominium corporations and unit owners to have a clear understanding of the jurisdictional boundaries when filing or responding to applications. Seeking legal advice or referring to relevant legislation can help clarify the jurisdictional scope and ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

bottom of page