Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Choose your role:
Niagara South Condominium Corporation No. 12 v. Spicer - 2022 ONCAT 21 - 2022-03-21
Corporation:
NSCC 12 S
Date:
2022-03-21
Summary:
The case involves a dispute between Niagara South Condominium Corporation No 12 (NSCC 12) and the respondent regarding her request to keep a dog in her condominium unit as an emotional support animal. NSCC 12 argues that the respondent has not provided sufficient evidence of a disability and is in violation of the no-pet provisions in their declaration and rules. After reviewing the evidence, the Condominium Authority Tribunal found that the respondent had not established an exemption to the pet restrictions and was therefore in breach of the rules. The tribunal ordered the respondent to remove the dog from her unit within 14 days and to pay $200 in costs to NSCC 12.
Under:
CAT Decisions - Decision
Compliance with Governing Documents
Indemnification or Compensation
Pets and Animals
Verdict:
The Niagara South Condominium Corporation No 12 v Spicer case shows that sufficient evidence of a disability is necessary for accommodation of an emotional support animal and that violating condominium rules can result in serious consequences. The decision also highlights the potential of disputes between condominium corporations and residents. In summary, it is important to provide appropriate evidence and follow condominium rules and regulations to avoid potential conflicts.
Takeaways:
The case involved a dispute between Niagara South Condominium Corporation No 12 (NSCC 12) and the respondent over her request to keep a dog as an emotional support animal in her unit.
NSCC 12 argued that the respondent did not provide enough evidence of a disability to warrant accommodation and that she was in violation of their no-pet provisions.
The Condominium Authority Tribunal, after reviewing the evidence, found that the respondent had not established an exemption to the pet restrictions and was therefore in violation of the rules. The tribunal ordered her to remove the dog from her unit within 14 days and pay $200 in costs to NSCC 12.
The case highlights the importance of providing sufficient evidence for disability accommodations, and the seriousness of violating condominium rules and regulations.
While the case ended with the removal of the dog and payment of costs, it also demonstrates the potential for disputes between condominium residents and corporations, and the need for fair and impartial dispute resolution processes.
Recommendations:
Provide Sufficient Evidence: When seeking accommodation for a disability, it is crucial to provide adequate and detailed evidence. In the case of requesting an exemption to pet restrictions, ensure that medical documentation clearly establishes the existence of a disability that necessitates the accommodation of an emotional support animal.
Communication and Mediation: Encourage open communication and attempts at mediation between the parties involved before escalating the matter to a tribunal. In the cited case, there were several exchanges between the condominium corporation and the unit owner regarding the accommodation request. Exploring potential resolutions and understanding each party's needs can help prevent unnecessary disputes.
Familiarize Yourself with Governing Documents: It is important for both condominium corporations and residents to be familiar with the governing documents of the condominium. This includes understanding the provisions related to pets and animals. Residents should review and adhere to the rules to avoid potential violations, while condominium corporations should ensure that the rules are clear, fair, and compliant with applicable laws and regulations.