19/07/2022 – Jurisdiction British Columbia
Part 85 published on 01/03/2024
Strata Corporation did not have proper basis for claim in relation to alleged defamation or improper sending of email messages or improper behaviour at strata meetings.
The Strata Corporation alleged that the Respondent owner had misbehaved in various ways, including the following:
- Sending numerous inappropriate email messages to all owners in the strata (which messages were alleged to be defamatory of the members of the strata Council).
- Misbehaving at meetings of the Strata Corporation.
- Videotaping meetings of the Strata Corporation (without consent) and posting those videos on social media.
The Strata Corporation applied to the Civil Resolution Tribunal, seeking an order restraining this alleged misconduct.
The Tribunal made orders that the Respondents not video record Strata meetings without consent and that Mr. Wong remove his YouTube videos and comments. The Tribunal dismissed all the other relief sought by the Strata corporation. The Tribunal held that:
- The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to deal with defamation claims.
- The By-laws of the Strata Corporation generally did not regulate the conduct of participants at meetings. However, the Strata Corporation could pass such by-laws if it wished to do so.
The Strata Corporation petitioned to Court, seeking an order that the matter be remitted back to the Tribunal for reconsideration. The Court dismissed the petition, finding nothing patently unreasonable in the Tribunal’s decision.
The Owners, Strata Plan LMS 2461 v. Wong (B.C. Supreme Court) 2022 BCSC1222