15/11/2019 – Jurisdiction Alberta
68 published on 01/12/2019
Owner ordered to remove dog
The by-laws of the condominium corporation stated that animals could only be permitted on the property with the Board’s consent (which could be arbitrarily withheld). The corporation subsequently adopted a policy prohibiting all dogs, subject to grandfathering of existing dogs. The grandfathering could not be “transferred” to a new dog when a grandfathered dog passed away.
The owner had a grandfathered dog and, when that dog passed away, acquired a new dog (after the implementation of the “no dogs” policy).
The Court held that the new dog was in violation of the policy and ordered that the dog be removed from the property by a stated deadline. The Court said:
This is not a case of the board of the Condominium Corporation taking a casual approach to the enforcement of its rules and regulations, or unreasonably enforcing them. It is a case of a couple who misunderstood the rules and in the throes of personal tragedy, purchased a new dog without getting the requisite approval of the board, or registering the dog.
The dog also did not have a service dog designation, and accordingly was not entitled to remain as a support dog under the Services Dog Act. However, the Court said that the owner was “at liberty to pursue designation of their dog as a service dog and submit it to the board for its consideration”.