Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Choose your role:
Peel Condominium Corporation No. 312 v. Singh - 2023 ONCAT 131 - 2023-09-14
Corporation:
PCC 312
Date:
2023-09-14
Summary:
Unit owners in Peel Condominium Corporation No. 312 (PCC 312), filed a complaint against their neighbor regarding unreasonable noise and vibrations, primarily attributed to the activities of children. They sought compliance with PCC 312's governing documents and the Condominium Act, 1998. the neigbor argued that these were normal family noises and that he was being discriminated against due to his family status, requesting accommodation under the Human Rights Code.
The Tribunal ruled that respondent's unit activities were indeed creating unreasonable noise and vibrations, constituting a nuisance. He failed to demonstrate discrimination based on family status. PCC 312 was granted the reimbursement of fees paid to the Tribunal but not additional legal costs due to inappropriate demands for legal expenses. The ruling ordered him to bring his unit into compliance by installing carpets, sound-reducing underlay, and restricting his children's activities at specific times.
Under:
CAT Decisions - Decision
Noise
Vibration
Verdict:
the Condominium Authority Tribunal ruled in favor of Peel Condominium Corporation No 312 in their complaint against the respondent for unreasonably loud noises and vibrations. The respondent was ordered to comply with the governing documents of PCC 312 and the Condominium Act 1998, while no discrimination on the basis of family status was found. The lesson from this verdict is that condominium residents must adhere to the rules and regulations of their condominium corporation to ensure a peaceful living environment for all.
Takeaways:
here are 3-5 takeaways from the Peel Condominium Corporation No 312 v Singh case:
Noise and Vibration Dispute: The case revolves around a dispute between Peel Condominium Corporation No 312 and the respondents regarding noise and vibration issues. The Intervenors who live in the unit directly below the respondent's unit complained of unreasonably loud noises and vibrations that were disrupting their quality of life.
Unreasonable Noise Findings: The tribunal found that the activities within respondent's unit were indeed creating unreasonable noise and vibrations that constituted a nuisance, annoyance, or disruption. The decision ordered the respondent to comply with the governing documents of PCC 312 and the Condominium Act 1998.
Discrimination Claims: The respondent claimed that he was being discriminated against based on his family status, as the noises primarily came from his children's activities. However, the tribunal ruled that the respondent had not demonstrated on a balance of probabilities that he was being discriminated against on the basis of family status.
Costs: PCC 312 requested costs, including pre-hearing costs of seeking compliance. The tribunal granted PCC 312 the right to be reimbursed for the fees paid to the tribunal and awarded an additional amount for the costs of attempting to enforce compliance.
Hearing Procedure: The hearing for this case was conducted in writing using the tribunal's online system. Additionally, a video conference was held for cross-examining an acoustical engineer called by PCC 312. The parties provided evidence and made submissions, which were reviewed by the tribunal in reaching their decision.
Recommendations:
Compliance with Governing Documents: It is recommended that the respondent bring himself and the other residents in his unit into compliance with the governing documents of Peel Condominium Corporation No 312 (PCC 312) and with the Condominium Act 1998. This would help address the issue of unreasonable noise and vibrations and ensure adherence to the regulations set forth by the governing authority.
Address Noise Concerns: To mitigate the issue of noise disturbance, the respondent should take measures to reduce and control the noise levels coming from his unit. This could include implementing soundproofing measures, utilizing rugs or carpets to dampen noise, and ensuring that his children's activities do not excessively disturb neighbors, particularly after 10:30 pm, as mentioned in the information provided.
Seek Mediation and Communication: It is recommended that both parties, the respondent and the representatives of PCC 312, engage in mediation or open communication to find a resolution to the ongoing dispute. By discussing concerns, understanding each other's perspectives, and potentially finding a compromise, they may be able to reach a mutually agreeable solution and maintain a harmonious living environment within the condominium.