Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Choose your role:
Roszak v. Peel Standard Condominium Corporation No.1059 - 2023 ONCAT 158 - 2023-10-30
Corporation:
RPSCC 1059
Date:
Mon Oct 30 2023 00:00:00 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time)
Summary:
In the case of Roszak v. Peel Standard Condominium Corporation No.1059 (2023 ONCAT 158), the Condominium Authority Tribunal dismissed the application, stating it lacked jurisdiction. The applicant, a unit owner, claimed noise and vibrations from the unit above affected his quality of life. The respondent sought dismissal, asserting the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction as the issues related to construction deficiencies and Tarion warranty rights. The Tribunal agreed, finding the application concerned repair and maintenance issues falling under sections 89 and 90 of the Condominium Act, beyond its jurisdiction. The applicant's attempt to attribute issues to human activity was deemed a veiled jurisdictional maneuver. The order was not made private.
Under:
CAT Decisions - Motion Order
Noise
Verdict:
Verdict/Lesson:
The Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) dismissed the application in Roszak v. Peel Standard Condominium Corporation No.1059, stating that the issues related to noise and vibrations were primarily about construction deficiencies and repair matters, falling under sections 89 and 90 of the Condominium Act, 1998, which are outside the CAT's jurisdiction. The CAT also rejected the Applicant's request to keep the order private due to lack of relevant justification.
Takeaways:
The Condominium Authority Tribunal dismissed the application in Roszak v. Peel Standard Condominium Corporation No.1059, emphasizing that the issues raised by the applicant primarily pertained to construction deficiencies and repair matters, falling outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. The applicant sought remedies related to noise and vibrations allegedly caused by construction issues in his unit, requesting repairs and reimbursement for selling his unit. The Tribunal held that the jurisdiction of the Tribunal is limited to disputes under section 117(2) of the Condominium Act, not extending to matters governed by sections 89 and 90 of the Act concerning a corporation's responsibility for repairs and maintenance.
Recommendations:
Enhanced Jurisdictional Education:
The Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) should consider providing enhanced education and guidance to applicants, especially those who are self-represented, on the tribunal's jurisdictional limitations.
Develop informational resources or guidance documents that clearly explain the types of disputes and issues that fall within the CAT's jurisdiction, helping applicants understand whether their concerns are appropriate for tribunal adjudication.
Clarity in Complaint Allegations:
Encourage applicants to clearly articulate their complaints and allegations in a manner that aligns with the jurisdiction of the CAT.
Provide a standardized template or checklist for applicants to ensure that their claims focus on matters falling within the tribunal's authority, avoiding confusion or contradictory statements that may complicate jurisdictional assessments.
Timely Dispute Resolution Guidance:
Establish guidelines or procedures to provide timely and clear guidance to parties and applicants on the appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms for specific types of issues.
Ensure that parties are informed about alternative avenues, such as Tarion warranties or other legal channels, for addressing concerns related to construction deficiencies or repair and maintenance issues that may not fall within the CAT's jurisdiction.