12/07/2018 – Jurisdiction British Columbia
Part 63 published on 01/09/2018
Strata Corporation’s by-law did not limit rentals in compliance with Strata Property Act
Shawn Oaks Holdings Ltd. owned, and had rented, many units in the strata property. The strata corporation claimed that the rentals contravened the corporation’s by-laws. The relevant by-law said that the units could only be occupied by owners and their immediate families. The Court held that the by-laws in question did not prohibit rentals in compliance with Section 141 (2) (a) of the Strata Property Act. The Court said:
In my view, the fact that bylaw 3.1 is framed in terms of occupancy rather than rental is not necessarily fatal to whether it is a valid bylaw. The concern with using the verb “occupy” rather than verb “rent” in the bylaw, is that they are two overlapping, but not necessarily co-existent actions; there can be occupancy with or without rental. I have come to the conclusion that because they are different actions, and because bylaw 3.1 uses an extended definition of immediate family that is not consistent with the Regulations, a plain reading of bylaw 3.1 is that it does not prohibit rentals in compliance with the SPA.
The Court also said that this matter did not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Civil Resolution Tribunal, under Section 189.6 of the Strata Property Act. The Court said:
Considering the totality of the factors argued, I find that in the circumstances of these petitions, it is not in the interests of justice and fairness for the CRT to resolve the dispute.
The Owners, Strata Plan VR 855 v. Shawn Oak Holdings Ltd. (BC Supreme Court) July 12, 2018