top of page
White Columns
< Back

Nicholaos Nassios v Grey Standard Condominium Corporation No. 46 - 2019 ONCAT 36 - 2019-09-09

Corporation:

NNGSCC 46

Date:

2019-09-09

Under:

CAT Decisions - Motion Order

Summary:

This Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) decision, dated September 9, 2019, addresses a motion for correction or clarification filed by the applicant regarding a prior dismissal order concerning his application for records from Grey Standard Condominium Corporation No. 46 (GSCC46). The CAT's rules allow for correction or clarification of orders, but only for typographical, calculation, or similar errors, which was not the case here. The applicant claimed that the prior order was wrongly decided and raised concerns about the interpretation of evidence. However, the CAT ruled that its decisions are intended to be the final word, and Rule 30 does not permit reconsideration based on the alleged incorrectness of a decision. Therefore, the correction motion was denied.

Verdict:

The Correction Motion filed by the applicant to correct or clarify a prior Dismissal Order related to his application for records was denied by the Condominium Authority Tribunal. The Tribunal ruled that it did not have jurisdiction to reconsider the matter, as Rule 30 of its Rules of Practice only allows corrections for typographical or calculation errors, not a review of whether a decision was wrongly made. The Tribunal emphasized that its decisions are intended to be the final word on a matter and that remedies for incorrect decisions should be sought in other forums.




Takeaways:

This Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) decision, dated September 9, 2019, addresses a correction motion filed by the applicant, who sought to correct or clarify a prior dismissal order related to his application for records from Grey Standard Condominium Corporation No. 46 (GSCC46).

Rule 30 of the CAT's Rules of Practice allows for corrections or clarifications of orders and decisions, but only for typographical, calculation, or similar errors. It does not permit reconsideration of a decision based on the belief that it was wrongly decided.

In this case, Mr. Nassios argued that the prior order was wrongly decided, claiming an incorrect interpretation of evidence and unfair handling of the motion for dismissal. However, the CAT held that it lacked jurisdiction to reconsider the matter as it did not fall within the scope of Rule 30.

The CAT emphasized that its decisions are intended to be the final word on a matter, and remedies for perceived incorrect decisions are available through other forums.

Consequently, the Correction Motion was denied, and the prior dismissal order stood.

Recommendations: 

Ensure a clear understanding of the rules and procedures governing the specific legal process in which you are involved to avoid pursuing remedies that fall outside the established framework.

If you believe a decision is incorrect, explore the available remedies within the given legal context or forum, rather than seeking corrections or clarifications that do not align with the applicable rules.

Legal disputes should be addressed in the appropriate forum; if you disagree with a decision, follow the established appeal or review processes instead of attempting to revisit the matter in a manner not supported by the rules or regulations.

bottom of page