Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Choose your role:
Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1767 v. Gomes, Kiziltas
Corporation:
Date:
2025-01-03
Summary:
This case revolved around a dispute between a condominium corporation and a unit owner, who requested a document related to a specific work order. The corporation initially denied the request citing that record does not exist but later provided a redacted version, which the unit owner disputed.
Under:
Records
Verdict:
The CAT ordered the Condominium Corporation to provide the unit owner with an unredacted copy of the work order, stating that the reasons for redaction were not valid. This decision affirms the right of unit owners to access records, and the responsibility of corporations to cooperate with such requests.
Takeaways:
- Condominium corporations must provide unit owners with records they request, unless those records do not exist.
- Condominium corporations must provide clear and valid reasons for redacting any information in the records provided.
- Condominium corporations may be ordered to pay costs if they fail to comply with such record requests.
Recommendations:
- Condominium boards or managers should ensure that they maintain accurate and up-to-date records of all work orders and other relevant documents.
- They should be prepared to provide such documents upon request from unit owners, unless there are valid legal reasons not to.
- In cases where certain information may need to be redacted, condominium boards should be able to clearly articulate the reasons for doing so, ensuring they are in line with legal provisions.