Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Choose your role:
Reva Landau v Metropolitan Condominium Corporation No. 757 - 2020 ONCAT 19 - 2020-05-26
Corporation:
RLMCC 757
Date:
2020-05-26
Summary:
In the case of Reva Landau v Metropolitan Condominium Corporation No 757, the applicant requested access to a legal opinion letter related to the authority of the condominium corporation to add costs to the common expenses of individual unit owners for violations of certain rules. The condominium corporation, MTCC757, claimed solicitor-client privilege and the exemption from record production under sub-section 554b of the Condominium Act 1998. The dispute centered around whether solicitor-client privilege applies to record requests and whether the exemption under subsection 554b applied. The decision found that the applicant was not entitled to the requested legal opinion as solicitor-client privilege continues to protect MTCC757. The exemption under subsection 554b was deemed inapplicable in this case.
Under:
CAT Decisions - Decision
Access to Records
Fees, Costs, Penalties
Verdict:
The quick verdict in the case of Reva Landau v Metropolitan Condominium Corporation No 757 is that Ms. Landau is not entitled to the requested legal opinion letter. The decision reaffirms the importance of solicitor-client privilege in protecting confidential communications and emphasizes that the exemption under subsection 554b of the Condominium Act 1998 does not apply in this case.
Takeaways:
Solicitor-client privilege: The decision highlights the importance of solicitor-client privilege, which protects communications between lawyers and their clients. The Tribunal ruled that the legal opinion requested by the applicant was protected by solicitor-client privilege and, therefore, Metropolitan Condominium Corporation No 757 was not obligated to produce it.
Exemption under subsection 554b: the applicant argued that the exemption under subsection 554b of the Condominium Act 1998 should apply, which exempts records relating to actual or contemplated litigation. However, the Tribunal found that this exemption did not apply in this case, and therefore, did not oblige the condominium corporation to produce the requested legal opinion.
Costs: Despite both parties claiming their costs, the Tribunal did not issue an order for costs in this case.
Recommendations:
Protect solicitor-client privilege: Condo corporations should ensure that all communications and advice provided by their lawyers are protected by solicitor-client privilege. This can help prevent the disclosure of confidential information and legal opinions to third parties without the corporation's consent.
Understand record production rules: Condo owners and corporations should be familiar with the rules governing record production under the Condominium Act 1998, including the exemptions under subsection 554b and the types of records that can be excluded from disclosure based on solicitor-client privilege.
Seek legal advice before taking action: When faced with disputes or issues related to record production, condo owners and corporations should seek legal advice from qualified professionals. This can help ensure that they understand their rights and obligations under the law and can take necessary steps to protect their interests.