06/20/2024 – Jurisdiction Alberta
Part 87 published on 01/09/2024
Condominium corporation’s caveat could include chargebacks against the one unit
A resident of one of the units improperly caused damage to a wall between the resident’s unit and a neighbouring unit. As a result, the condominium corporation incurred costs (including repair costs, legal costs and extra management costs) which the condominium corporation charged back against the unit of the resident who caused the damage. The condominium corporation had registered a caveat against the unit (for recovery of these amounts). The Court considered the following questions: Was the Caveat filed by Condo Corp valid? For the Caveat to be valid, there must have been “contributions” owing to Condo Corp with respect to the Herbert Unit?
The Court held that a condominium corporation’s caveat could include amounts incurred by the condominium corporation due to the misconduct of a resident (if such chargebacks were authorized by a by-law of the condominium corporation). The Court said:
…it is my view that the legislature did not intend to restrict contributions to only those levies made “at regular intervals”. More specifically, I am of the view that an amount owing under the bylaws “on a basis other than in proportion to the unit factors…” could be a contribution pursuant to s 39(1)(a)(ii) of the CPA (Condominium Property Act).
… s 39(1)(a)(ii) starts with the words “subject to the regulations”. I do not agree with them that means the levy under this provision must be one authorized by the regulations. Rather, it means that the levy “provided for in the bylaws” could not be one contrary to the regulations to fall under this provision. In this case, Condo Corp’s bylaw 39 is not in contravention of the regulations.
Condominium Plan No 912 3701 (Liberton Village Condominium Corporation) v Herbert, 2024 ABKB 362