Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Choose your role:
St. Louis v. York Condominium Corporation No. 42 - 2021 ONCAT 41 - 2021-05-11
Corporation:
SLYCC 42
Date:
2021-05-11
Summary:
In the case of St. Louis v. York Condominium Corporation No. 42, a Consent Order was issued under section 1.47 of the Condominium Act, 1998. The Applicant and the Respondent, York Condominium Corporation No. 42, reached an agreement to settle the dispute during Stage 2 - Mediation. The order outlines the terms of the settlement, including a monetary payment made by the Applicant and the provision of various requested records by the Respondent within a specified timeframe. This agreement allows for the case to be closed, and the order emphasizes that confidentiality will be maintained regarding the payment amount. Non-compliance with the terms can lead to enforcement through the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
Under:
CAT Decisions - Consent Order
Access to Records
Verdict:
In the case of St. Louis v. York Condominium Corporation No. 42, the parties reached a Consent Order through mediation. This underscores the effectiveness of alternative dispute resolution methods in settling condominium disputes efficiently. The Order outlines a financial settlement, timely provision of specific records, confidentiality of financial arrangements, and the possibility of legal enforcement in case of non-compliance. It illustrates the importance of clarity in specifying record requests and the need for parties to adhere to mutually agreed-upon terms to avoid legal repercussions.
Takeaways:
Consent Agreement: The case of St. Louis v. York Condominium Corporation No. 42 was settled through a Consent Order, indicating that both parties, the Applicant and Respondent, reached an agreement during the mediation process, ensuring a mutually agreed resolution.
Financial Settlement: A monetary sum was paid by the Applicant to the Respondent as part of the agreement. The exact amount remains confidential, and it is explicitly stated that this payment will not set a precedent for future requests for records.
Timely Record Access: The Respondent committed to providing specific records to the Applicant within 15 days of receiving the payment. These records include financial details, meeting notices, security orders, and insurance policies, ensuring timely access to relevant information.
Clarity on Records: The Consent Order provides clarification on the types of records to be delivered, emphasizing that the property insurance policy refers to the entire policy, and the security site orders cover both level 1 and level 3 guards.
Legal Enforcement: Non-compliance with the terms of the order may lead to enforcement through the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, underlining the legal consequences of failing to fulfill the agreed-upon obligations.
Recommendations:
Clarity in Agreements: Parties involved in condominium disputes should strive for clarity in their agreements and settlements, specifying the terms in detail. In this case, the Consent Order explicitly outlined the records to be provided, the payment, and the confidentiality of financial arrangements. Parties should ensure that all aspects of their agreement are unambiguously defined.
Effective Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Mediation and ADR methods can be effective in resolving condominium disputes swiftly. Encouraging parties to reach mutually agreeable solutions outside of court can save time and resources. The use of ADR should be promoted as a means of resolving condominium-related issues.
Legal Enforcement as a Last Resort: While ADR is valuable, parties should be aware that legal enforcement is available if any party fails to comply with the terms of an order or agreement. Parties should be cautious and ensure they adhere to the agreed-upon terms, as non-compliance can lead to legal consequences in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Legal avenues should be considered only as a last resort.