Offices in Ottawa and Perth
(613) 722-1500

CONTACT US (613) 722-1500

Nuisances, Annoyances, Disruptions – Oh, My: Condominium Authority Tribunal’s Jurisdiction is Expanding January 1st 2022

Nuisances, Annoyances, Disruptions – Oh, My: Condominium Authority Tribunal’s Jurisdiction is Expanding January 1st 2022

By:

Posted November 15, 2021

Changes to the Condominium Act, 1998 (Condo Act) have been pending for some time now, however, the wait seems to be over according to an announcement by the provincial government; some amendments to the Condo Act will come into force in a mere few months on January 1, 2022.

The most noteworthy amendments deal with (1) nuisances including annoyances and disruptions on condominium premises and (2) the expansion of the Condominium Authority Tribunal’s (CAT’s) jurisdiction to resolve disputes pertaining to these nuisances.

With regards to nuisances in the condo building, amendments to section 117 of the Condo will prohibit a person from:

1. causing, through an act or omission, conditions, or activities in a condominium (condo) likely to damage condo property or cause injury or illness to an individual; and

2. carrying on or permitting activities in a condo if they result (to an individual in a condo corporation) in the creation or continuation of:

a. Any unreasonable noise that is a nuisance, annoyance or disruption, or
b. Any other nuisances, annoyances or disruption prescribed in the regulation.

Amendments are also being made to O. Reg. 48/01 under the Condo Act to outline the ‘prescribed’ nuisances, annoyances or disruptions referred to in section 117(2)(b). The Regulation will include the following nuisances, annoyances or disruptions, if they are unreasonable:

  1. Odour
  2. Smoke
  3. Vapour
  4. Light
  5. Vibration

As for the expansion of the CAT’s jurisdiction, amendments to O. Reg. 179/17 under the Condo Act will allow the CAT to deal with certain disputes regarding:

i. Nuisances, annoyances or disruptions as set out under subsection 117(2) of the Condo Act and in O. Reg. 48/01 (the ‘prescribed’ nuisances referred to above);

ii. Provisions in a condo corporation’s governing documents (i.e., its by-laws, declaration or rules) that prohibit, restrict or otherwise govern, the activities described in subsection 117 of the Condo Act or in O. Reg. 48/01, or any other type of nuisance, annoyance or disruption to an individual in a condo corporation; and

iii. Provisions in a condo corporation’s governing documents that govern the indemnification of the corporation and/or owners, etc. in reference to the disputes in (ii).

It should be noted that the dangerous activities listed under section 117(1) (i.e. activities in a condo likely to damage condo property or cause injury or illness to an individual) have NOT been assigned as being under the CAT’s new and expanded purview. Accordingly, complainants of these matters will continue having to litigate before the courts.

While the CAT’s authority may be restricted concerning dangerous activities, one of its most recent decisions has expanded the CAT’s authority on another front. Namely, in Martis v Peel Condominium Corporation No 253 (Martis), the CAT held that it was within its jurisdiction to hear matters involving Human Rights issues when it heard a dispute regarding an emotional support animal.

In Martis, a condo owner sought permission to keep a large dog on the premises as an emotional support animal.  The condo owner submitted that this was within the condo corporation’s required reasonable accommodation under Human Rights law. On the other hand, the condo corporation argued that the issue was outside the CAT’s jurisdiction being that the condo owner’s application dealt with Human Rights issues. The CAT ultimately decided to allow the condo owner’s application to proceed. The CAT is quoted:

The request for an accommodation is being made in the context of the Pet Rule and the [condo’s Emotional Support Animal (ESA)] Policy. I conclude that given the issues surrounding both the Pet Rule and the ESA Policy, this matter is properly within the jurisdiction of the CAT.

The decision in Martis signals a stride forward to expand the CAT’s jurisdiction beyond the amendments coming into force in January 2022. Many commentors welcome the expansion of this authority as it makes the CAT a more accessible, easy-to-engage-with platform for condo dispute resolution. And, to take it further, some critics of the amendments have called for an expansion of the CAT’s authority to deal with the recovery of legal costs and fees relating to the disputes heard.

Only time will tell how much further the CAT’s jurisdiction may expand. If Martis is any indication though, it seems further expansions to CAT powers could occur sooner rather than later.

This blog post was written by Daniella Sicoli-Zupo, a Partner in the Real Estate team, and Articling Student Sarah Antonious.

More Resources

Blog |
Family Law
By: 
When couples part ways, the shared ownership of a matrimonial home often becomes a contentious issue. In Ontario, the law recognizes two forms of co-ownership:[...]
Blog |
Real Estate
By: 
If you are purchasing a home in Ontario, you likely know that you should retain a real estate lawyer to close the transaction for you.[...]
Blog |
Wills, Trusts and Estates
By: 

Posted May 14, 2024

This is often a question that arises when someone dies with debts and the estate trustees  are at a loss as to what to do[...]
Blog |
Business Law
By: 

Posted May 9, 2024

Every story has to start somewhere. When buying or selling a business, the journey usually begins with a well drafted letter of intent. A letter of[...]
Blog |
Wills, Trusts and Estates
By: 

Posted April 23, 2024

In this day and age, social media is at the forefront of everything – it’s where people obtain news, it’s where people spend numerous hours[...]
Blog |
Wills, Trusts and Estates
By: 
Clients frequently ask how often they should update their Wills. We generally suggest that when clients sit down to do the oh so fun task[...]
Daniella Sicoli-Zupo

Daniella Sicoli-Zupo

Since being called to the Bar of Ontario in 1995, I have practiced in the areas of family law, real estate law, and wills and estates. In 2005, I focused my practice primarily on assisting clients in the area of residential real estate law. Since 2012, I have also assisted clients with their commercial refinancing and worked with several builders, completing their land development work and sale transactions.  I truly enjoy seeing a development progress from vacant land to the finished project. I am a lifetime resident of Ottawa. I graduated from the University of Ottawa with a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1990 then obtained my law degree from the University of Western Ontario in 1993. I was called to the Bar of Ontario in 1995. I have sat as the Treasurer and Member of the Board of Directors for Villa Marconi Long Term Care Centre in Ottawa. I... Read More

Read More About Daniella Sicoli-Zupo
Sarah Antonious

Sarah Antonious

I am an associate with the firm’s Commercial Litigation and Estate Litigation groups. My practice focuses exclusively on contentious litigation which often requires me to deal with complex commercial matters, as well matters that involve interpersonal conflicts between parties. I am a results-focused litigator who is both detail-oriented and a big-picture thinker. To all of my clients, I am an empathetic advocate who prioritizes a careful, strategic and resourceful approach to every conflict. I was called to the Ontario Bar in 2022, after graduating from the University of Ottawa (English Common Law program) and completing my articles with the firm. Prior to obtaining my law degree, I attended Carleton University, where I earned a Bachelor of Arts (Honours) majoring in Law with a Concentration in Business Law. Before joining Mann Lawyers, I spent time working at a federal regulatory tribunal specializing in accessibility for people with disabilities. During that time,... Read More

Read More About Sarah Antonious

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

"*" indicates required fields

Name*
Consent*
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.