08/28/2024 – Jurisdiction Ontario
Part 87 published on 01/09/2024
Condominium Corporation’s By-law and Rule prohibiting animals and pets are reasonable and enforceable
The unit owner claimed that the Corporation’s no-animal and no-pets By-law and Rule were unreasonable and should be held to be invalid. The tribunal found that the By-law and Rule were reasonable. In arriving at this decision, the Tribunal also held that the board was entitled to deference in determining how to administer the affairs of the Corporation. The Tribunal also noted that this condominium had been a no-pet building since 1987; and current owners had bought their units with this understanding.
The Tribunal said:
Ms. Chown cites the case of 215 Glenridge Ave. Ltd. Partnership v. Waddington (“Waddington”) to argue the considerations a board should take if they ban all pets. Counsel for FCC 19 argues that the Court in Waddington confirmed that it is, in fact, possible for a Rule to prohibit pets where allowing pets would compromise the safety and welfare of owners and the property or cause an unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of the units and common elements, which is specifically the case at FCC 19 according to the board’s evidence. Counsel has pointed out that jurisprudence has recognized that decisions made by boards of condominium corporations should be shown deference. As this Tribunal has recognized on numerous occasions, case‑law has evolved to recognize the authority of decisions made by boards. This may otherwise be known as the business judgment principle. In this circumstance, I find that it is the board who is in the best position to understand the needs of the corporation.
…
There is evidence that following the survey, at the June 27, 2023, board meeting, the board declared the By‑law and Rule to be reasonable. Ms. Chown posits that the question to ask is a further one – namely “is the prohibition the only reasonable option …?” That is not the correct approach. If the By‑laws and Rules are reasonable, then that ends the matter.
…
I find that the board of FCC 19 is entitled to deference so long as their decision falls within a range of reasonableness. I defer to the board based on the business judgment principle. The decision as to whether the building should change to allow pets is one to be decided using the processes already set out in the Act.
Chown v. Frontenac Condominium Corporation No. 19, 2024 ONCAT 133