24/08/2022 – Jurisdiction Ontario
Part 79 published on 01/09/2022
Appeal Dismissed. Court dismisses owner’s claim for oppression. No vote of owners required to authorize required replacements of balconies and elevator.
The owner alleged that the condominium corporation should have called for a vote respecting the decision to replace balconies and the elevator (and to levy a special assessment for these purposes). The owner alleged that the corporation’s failure to call for a vote amounted to oppression.
The lower Court dismissed the owner’s application. [See Condo Cases Across Canada, Part 70, June 2020.]
The owner appealed to the Court of Appeal. The appeal was dismissed. The Court of Appeal said:
The motion judge correctly identified that s. 97 of the (Condominium Act) must be read harmoniously and that the “substantial additions or alterations” provision found in s. 97(4) is circumscribed by s.97(1) of the Act. In effect, “[s]ection 97(1) provides that remedial work will not trigger s. 97(4)”.