ARC Accounts Recovery Corporation v. Westmorland Condominium Corporation No. 48 (Queen's Bench of New Brunswick)

17/05/13 – Jurisdiction New Brunswick
Part 24 published on 01/11/08
Owner not prevented from using designated visitors parking area

The condominium contains 28 residential units and 2 commercial units.  The 2 commercial units are owned by ARC.  Each of the 28 residential units has a designated indoor parking space.  The 2 commercial units have no such designated parking spaces.  The manager of ARC had been using a parking space located in a surface parking area (which is part of the common elements).  The condominium corporation prepared and circulated a Homeowners’ Guide which included the following statement: 

“The outside parking area is strictly for visitors and for short term use of guests of the residents.” 

At the corporation’s AGM held on December 2, 2003, a motion was also passed to approve the Homeowners’ Guide.  ARC then applied to Court for a determination of the following question:  Did the Homeowners’ Guide prevent ARC from continuing to use the outside parking area?  The Court’s answer was “no”.  The Court said that the condominium corporation had not established any “valid basis, at this time, for restricting ARC’s use of the visitor parking area”.  The Court accordingly made the following ruling: 

“ARC is therefore entitled to a declaration that at present its manager’s right to park a passenger type automobile in what has been labeled as the visitor parking area located in the common elements of the condominium property cannot be restricted or hindered by (the condominium corporation) on the basis of its Declaration, By-laws or Rules and Regulations as presently constituted.” 

[Editorial Comment:  The case does not contain any reference to the Site Plan or to the Zoning By-law or any other municipal parking regulations (which might require that the outside parking spaces be set aside for visitors).  Therefore, I assume that no such “municipal restrictions” applied in this case.]