Court of Appeal Confirms Validity of Restriction in Declaration

A commercial unit owner argued in court that a restriction in the declaration preventing them and their employees from using the condominium recreational facilities was inconsistent with the Condominium Act, 1998, and sought to amend the declaration. The corporation argued that the provision fell within the types of provisions permitted by the Act. The application was dismissed, and the owner appealed, arguing that only exclusive use common elements should be restricted. The appeal was also dismissed, and the Court of Appeal confirmed that a restriction with respect to the use of a common element does not have to be specified in Schedule F. The corporation argued that the owner’s interpretation would have created an absurd result, and the owner’s argument was inconsistent with the City of Toronto site-specific by-law, the Act, and a corporation’s by-laws and rules.