Ryan v. York Condominium Corporation No. 340 (Ontario Superior Court)

An owner sued the condominium corporation for damages suffered as a result of the condominium corporation’s failure to address water penetration with reasonable haste.  The owner was successful.  The Court said:

If one examines the whole history and does not approach the facts incrementally, what emerges is that YCC 340 has had a known water penetration problem for over thirty years and has not fixed the problem.  This is patently not reasonable.  Even if one ignores YCC 340’s state of knowledge acquired before 2010 about the existence of a water penetration problem, the stark fact emerges that Mrs. Bird and Mr. Ryan advised YCC 340 about the water infiltration problem in April 2010 and repeatedly thereafter, but it took YCC 340 until November2014 (4.5 years) to effect repairs that appear so far to have arrested the water infiltration problem and another year to remediate the presence of mould.

The Court awarded the owner $69,691.39, broken down as follows:

• $37,457.07 – common area expenses for the condominium unit for 2011 – 2015
• $7,456.84 – municipal realty taxes for the condominium unit for 2011 – 2015
• $3,780.00 – gas mileage expense for medical appointments 2011 – 2015 (28 trips)
• $5,997.48 – legal expense (for legal services prior to the court proceedings)
• $15,0000 – for repairs to the interior of the condominium unit

The water damage had forced the owner to move to his farm property, far from the condominium.  In short, he was not able to make use of his condominium unit.  The Court said:

Mr. Ryan’s quiet enjoyment of his Unit has been disrupted and he was unable to enjoy the benefits of ownership.  The expense he incurred for common area expenses and for municipal realty taxes was a wasted expense.

…        

Mr. Ryan, however, is not entitled to recover his $20,000 claim for utilities and maintenance expenses for the farm property.  These expenses were not wasted, and it would be double counting to make an award on this account.  He is also not entitled to recover his claim for the $4,206.24 special assessment, which is or will be used to effect repairs to the condominium buildings.  As a unit holder, Mr. Ryan remains obliged to pay this expense, which will be for his benefit.

The Court did not award the owner damages for mental distress (because he proved no loss under that head of damages).

Although the Court found that YCC 340 had breached its repair obligations, the Court did not find any oppression.  The Court said: “Oppressive conduct is coercive, harsh, harmful, or an abuse of power”, and may also include “unfairly prejudicial conduct” or “conduct that unfairly disregards the interests of the claimant”.  The Court said that, in this case, the corporation’s conduct was “ineffective until recently but it was not abusive or oppressive”.

The Court also said that mandatory mediation/arbitration did not apply to this claim, at least in part because the owner had included a claim for oppression under section 135 of the Condominium Act.