top of page
White Columns
< Back

Russell v. York Condominium Corporation No. 50 - 2021 ONCAT 53 - 2021-06-18

Corporation:

RYCC 50

Date:

2021-06-18

Under:

CAT Decisions - Motion Order
Access to Records
Adequacy of Records
Fees, Costs, Penalties

Summary:

In the case of Russell v. York Condominium Corporation No. 50, the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) addressed a motion brought by York Condominium Corporation No. 50 (YCC50) to exclude testimony from two witnesses introduced by the applicant. The applicant sought certain records from YCC50, claiming they were not adequately provided to him. YCC50 objected to the relevance and repetition of the testimony, citing a Supreme Court of Canada case, R. v. Handy, and the presence of hearsay evidence. The CAT ruled that the testimony of the witnesses was relevant to determine whether YCC50 provided adequate records to the applicant. It also allowed hearsay evidence, leaving the weight of the testimony to be determined later.

Verdict:

The Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) rejected a motion by York Condominium Corporation No. 50 (YCC50) to exclude the testimony of two witnesses presented by the applicant. The CAT ruled that the testimony was relevant to the question of whether YCC50 provided adequate records to the applicant and should not be excluded, emphasizing that Ontario tribunals have a wider discretion to admit evidence compared to courts, and that the weight of this testimony would be determined later in the case. The CAT also clarified that principles of criminal law should be used cautiously in its civil proceedings, and hearsay evidence may be considered with the issue of its weight addressed in closing submissions.

Takeaways:

In the case of Russell v. York Condominium Corporation No. 50, the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) addressed a motion by York Condominium Corporation No. 50 (YCC50) to exclude testimony from two witnesses brought by the applicant who was seeking specific records from YCC50 under the Condominium Act, 1998.

YCC50's objections were based on grounds of relevance, repetition, and hearsay. They argued that the testimony provided by the pplicant's witnesses was not relevant, repetitive, and contained hearsay evidence.

The CAT has a wider discretion to admit evidence compared to courts, and it may consider evidence that is relevant to the subject matter of the proceeding, as long as it is not unduly repetitious, privileged, or subject to statutory inadmissibility.

The CAT allowed the testimony of the applicant's witnesses, stating that it may be relevant to determine whether YCC50 provided him with adequate records, but the weight of this testimony would be determined later in the case.

YCC50's objections based on a Supreme Court of Canada decision and the application of criminal law principles were not considered applicable to this civil proceeding within the CAT's jurisdiction.

Recommendations: 

Focus on Relevance: When presenting testimony or evidence in a legal proceeding, it's essential to ensure its relevance to the specific issues at hand. Parties should concentrate on how the evidence directly pertains to the case to avoid objections based on relevance.

Avoid Repetition: To maintain a clear and efficient legal process, parties should strive to present concise and non-repetitive evidence. This will help prevent objections related to unduly repetitious content and maintain the focus on the key aspects of the case.

Understand Applicability of Legal Principles: Parties should have a solid understanding of how legal principles and precedents apply to their specific case. It's crucial to make arguments that are directly relevant to the legal context of the dispute and avoid drawing parallels to principles from unrelated areas of law.

bottom of page