Durham Condominium Corporation No. 90 v. Carol Moore and Keith Wallace (Ontario Superior Court)

The respondent owners had installed a deck which was not in keeping with the Board’s policy respecting decks or with drawings which had been approved by the Board.  The Court said:   

Despite knowing that the Board’s approval was necessary for the deck, submitting two sets of plans that were approved by the Board, and being sent correspondence stating that the deck had to comply with the plans, the respondents built a deck that did not comply with the final approved plan. 

The Court ordered that the owners modify the deck, to bring it into conformity with the Board’s policy and approval. The Court’s decision included the following: 

1. The Board’s approval was clearly required under section 98 of the Condominium Act, 1998, and under the corporation’s Declaration. 
2. The owners were not treated unfairly.  Furthermore, the Court was not prepared to find that the Board’s policy was unreasonable.  The Court said:  The remedy for unit holders who oppose a policy or rule is to run for office and, once elected, to enact rules and policies that reflect the views of the majority of unit holders. 
3. There was no oppression. 
4. A condominium corporation can properly take steps to change its policies (with the appropriate grandfathering of prior conditions).  Furthermore, a policy change does not necessarily need to be passed as a rule.