top of page
White Columns
< Back

Nikolov v. Halton Standard Condominium Corporation No. 476 - 2022 ONCAT 65 - 2022-06-14

Corporation:

NHSCC 476

Date:

2022-06-14

Under:

CAT Decisions - Decision
Indemnification or Compensation
Light

Summary:

The case of Nikolov v Halton Standard Condominium Corporation No. 476 involved a dispute between a unit owner and the condominium corporation regarding a recently installed spotlight-style security light in the hallway that caused a nuisance, annoyance, or disruption that was deemed unreasonable. The unit owner requested that the light be replaced with a light that had baffles on the sides and directed downwards to reduce the brightness in her bedroom. However, the condominium corporation opposed the request, claiming that their light was not causing the problem.

The Condominium Authority of Ontario tribunal found that the new spotlight-style security light was the likely cause of the unreasonable light in the unit owner's bedroom and ordered its replacement with a baffled security light, similar to the ones already installed on the sides of three other corner units. Additionally, the condominium corporation was directed to reimburse the unit owner $200 for filing fees. Both parties had requested some form of recompense for their time and costs of the hearing, but the Tribunal Rules of Practice did not support a cost award in this case.

Verdict:

The case of Nikolov v Halton Standard Condominium Corporation No. 476 highlights the importance of negotiating and testing feasible solutions in dispute resolution between a unit owner and the condominium corporation. The decision also emphasizes the authority held by the Tribunal to resolve disputes relating to the creation of any prescribed nuisance, annoyance, or disruption, to an individual in a unit, the common elements, or the assets of the corporation. Finally, the tribunal found in favor of the applicant and ordered the condominium corporation to replace the spotlight-style security light with a baffled security light and reimburse the applicant $200 for filing fees.

Takeaways:

The case highlights a dispute between a unit owner and the condominium corporation over a spotlight-style security light that was recently installed by the corporation and caused a nuisance, annoyance, or disruption that was deemed unreasonable by the owner.

The Tribunal found that the spotlight-style security light installed by the condominium corporation was the likely cause of the unreasonable light in the unit owner's bedroom, and ordered its replacement with a baffled security light, similar to the ones already installed on the sides of three other corner units.

The Condominium Authority of Ontario tribunal also directed the condominium corporation to reimburse the unit owner $200 for filing fees.

The case highlights the importance of negotiating and testing feasible solutions in dispute resolution between a unit owner and the condominium corporation.

The case also emphasizes the jurisdiction held by the Tribunal to resolve disputes with respect to subsection 117(2) of the Condominium Act 1998, which covers issues relating to the creation of or continuation of any prescribed nuisance, annoyance, or disruption to an individual in a unit, the common elements, or the assets of the corporation.

Recommendations: 

Conduct a reasonable test to determine the source of the light: In the case, the parties were unable to agree on a test procedure to determine if the spotlight-style security light installed by the condominium corporation was the source of the light in the unit owner's bedroom. It is recommended that the parties collaborate and agree on a fair and reasonable test procedure, such as temporarily turning off the spotlight light, to observe the impact on the light in the bedroom.

Explore alternative lighting options: To address the issue of the bright light shining into the unit owner's bedroom, it is recommended that the condominium corporation consider installing a baffled security light, similar to the ones installed on the sides of other corner units. These baffled lights can help direct the light downwards and minimize the impact on neighboring units.

Improve communication and negotiation: In this case, the breakdown in negotiations between the unit owner and the condominium corporation contributed to the unresolved dispute. It is recommended that both parties engage in open and constructive communication, focusing on finding a mutually agreeable solution. This may involve exploring compromise, actively listening to each other's concerns, and seeking mediation if necessary to reach a resolution.

bottom of page