Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Choose your role:
Mohit Bali v Peel Condominium Corporation No.33 - 2019 ONCAT 25 - 2019-08-02
Corporation:
MBPCC 33
Date:
2019-08-02
Summary:
In the case of Mohit Bali v Peel Condominium Corporation No.33, a Consent Order was issued to settle a dispute regarding access to condominium records. The applicant and the respondent, Peel Condominium Corporation No. 33 (PCC33), reached an agreement incorporated into the Consent Order. The Order specified that records requests dated January 3 and January 29, 2019 were the basis of the case. It was agreed that all records requested on January 3, 2019, were provided, except for "minutes of meetings held within the last 12 months," which the applicant withdrew. The Order outlined a protocol for the applicant to send questions about repairs, with the respondent providing answers. The Consent Order confirmed the satisfaction of the January 3 and January 29, 2019 Records Requests. It also preserved the applicant's right to seek additional records under the Condominium Act, 1998, through further requests.
Under:
CAT Decisions - Consent Order
Access to Records
Adequacy of Records
Verdict:
The Consent Order in the case of Mohit Bali v Peel Condominium Corporation No.33 demonstrates the effectiveness of negotiated resolutions in condominium disputes. Parties agreed to withdraw specific records requests and establish a structured protocol for addressing needed repairs, fostering polite and respectful communication. This approach allows for the resolution of specific issues while preserving the Applicant's right to seek further records under the Condominium Act. Ultimately, it highlights the Tribunal's role in facilitating reasonable compromises to address the concerns of all parties involved.
Takeaways:
Consent Order Agreement: the applicant and Peel Condominium Corporation No. 33 (PCC33) reached an agreement to settle their dispute, which was formalized into a Consent Order.
Records Request Dispute: The case centered around two Records Requests dated January 3 and January 29, 2019, with a specific focus on the "minutes of meetings held within the last 12 months."
Resolution Protocol: The Consent Order outlined a structured protocol for resolving the matter. The applicant would provide a numbered list of questions related to needed repairs, and PCC33 would respond within 30 days.
Polite Communication: The communication between the parties was to be conducted respectfully and politely via email.
Future Record Requests: The Consent Order clarified that it did not limit the applicant's ability to seek records under the Condominium Act, 1998, by filing further Requests for Records, except for those covered by the January 3 and January 29, 2019 Records Requests.
Recommendations:
Negotiation and Mediation: Encourage parties in condominium disputes to engage in negotiation and mediation to reach mutually acceptable resolutions. This approach can help avoid costly and time-consuming legal proceedings, as seen in this case.
Structured Communication Protocols: Implement structured communication protocols, as demonstrated in this Consent Order, to ensure that parties involved in disputes maintain respectful and polite communication. Such protocols can help reduce tension and promote productive dialogue.
Preservation of Legal Rights: In consent orders, it's important to explicitly state that the resolution does not limit the parties' rights under the relevant legislation. In this case, the Consent Order clarifies that the Applicant can still seek records under the Condominium Act, 1998, by filing new requests when needed. This ensures that the parties' legal rights are preserved.