Part published on 01/01/70
Mandatory mediation and arbitration do not apply to this dispute respecting the validity of tenancies
This is a dispute about the validity of certain tenancies of units in the condominium. The question is whether the tenants together form a “family” and therefore whether the tenancies comply with the provision in the declaration that each unit be used only as a “one-family residence”. The respondent owner/landlord moved for dismissal of the condominium corporation’s Court application on the grounds that mandatory mediation and arbitration apply to the dispute in accordance with Section 132(4) of the Condominium Act, 1998.
The Court held that mandatory mediation and arbitration do not apply to this dispute. The Court’s reasons were as follows:
- “This case involves intertwined issues under the Condominium Act and the condominium declaration that go beyond the owners of the units and the corporation, who are the only parties referred to in the requirement of mediation-arbitration in Section 132(4) and (1)”.
- There are no significant factual disputes or behavioral issues in this case. The key issue in this case is “validity in law of the family provision in the declaration as well as whether reasonable steps have been taken by the respondent unit owner”.
?
[Editorial notes:
1. The owner has appealed this Decision.
2. In the context of interpretation of municipal zoning provision, I believe that the Courts decided long ago that a “family” could include any number of unrelated persons.
3. The Court in this case made reference to the recent decision in MTCC #1143 v. Li Peng. The Court gave reasons for distinguishing this case from the Li Peng case, noting that the Li Peng case involved “issues of conduct and use and gradations thereof”, as opposed to questions of legal validity or interpretation. Still, it seems to me that we don’t yet have any clear answer to the question: When does mandatory mediation apply to a dispute between a condominium corporation and an owner?