19/09/2017 – Jurisdiction Ontario
Part 60 published on 01/12/2017
Condominium corporation did not require owner involvement for the particular change of service
The corporation had an existing agreement for bulk cable television service (for all units) with the related costs added to the common expenses. The Board decided to enter into a new agreement that provided both bulk cable and internet services. The board did not involve the ownership in the decision. One of the owners asserted that this decision involved a substantial change, requiring approval by 2/3 vote of owners. The Court disagreed.
The Court said that – for purposes of Section 97 of the Condominium Act, 1998 – the “estimated cost of a change” does not include the portion of the cost (of the entire proposal) that does not involve any change and accordingly otherwise falls within the Board’s mandate.
The Court said:
I disagree with the applicants’ submission that the full cost of the Frontline Agreement is the cost of making a change in a service for the purposes of s. 97(2)(c) or s. 97(6) of the Act. MTCC 949 has been providing television service to units for many years under a contract with Rogers, and it is continuing to provide television service to units under the Frontline Agreement. The television service provided under the Frontline Agreement through internet protocol television, as opposed to through cable television that had been provided by Rogers, does not represent a change in a service that MTCC 949 provides to unit owners. The service is the same: provision of access to television viewing. The fact that a different technological delivery method is being used does not change the service itself. The only change in a service under the Frontline Agreement that MTCC 949 provides to unit owners is the provision of internet services. The incremental cost under the Frontline Agreement to provide internet services is the cost that must be considered for purposes of ss. 97(2)(c) and 97(6) of the Act.
The Court then held that – given the estimated cost – the change fell within the Board’s authority under Section 97(2)(c) of the Act. The Court also held that the corporation’s declaration and by-laws authorized the corporation to add the cost (for the internet service) to the common expenses.