Recent Changes to Cannabis Laws

person holding green canabis

Photo by Aphiwat chuangchoem on Pexels.com

On October 17, 2019, the Cannabis Regulations under the Cannabis Act were updated to establish rules for the legal production and sale of three new classes of cannabis: edible cannabis, cannabis extracts, and cannabis topicals (i.e. lotions). It is expected that these new products will be available to Canadians before the end of the year.

What does this mean for condominiums? Continue reading

Coming January 1, 2020…

advertisements batch blur business

Photo by brotiN biswaS on Pexels.com

We are still early into the Fall season, but there have already been a few announcements about changes coming January 1, 2020. More changes are expected to be announced, but here’s what we know so far.

Condo Authority of Ontario (CAO) 

The CAO announced that it will again have a 25% reduction in its fee for the 2020-2021 year. The fee will be $0.75/month per voting unit. The annual fee was initially set at $1/month per voting unit, but the costs to operate the CAO have been less than initially projected (in part because the CAT’s jurisdiction has not been expanded as originally anticipated under the previous government).

(Note: the Government of Ontario has proposed making the CAO responsible for 19 of the prescribed forms under the Act and its regulations, including information certificates, preliminary and notice of meeting, proxy, and forms related to record requests. These changes could take effect as early as January 1, 2020. Stay tuned on this one as it hasn’t been confirmed yet!).

Court Changes

The Government of Ontario announced some key changes to the court system in Ontario. The changes are aimed at increasing access to justice, reducing legal costs, and making the process quicker. On January 1, 2020 we will see the following changes:

  1. Increase in the monetary limit for Small Claims Court from $25,000 to $35,000.
  2. Increase in the monetary limit for Simplified Procedure actions in the Superior Court of Justice from $100,000 to $200,000.
  3. Other changes designed to reduce costs and speed up the process.

For those with claims with limitation periods expiring after January 1, 2020, you should discuss the pros and cons of commencing your actions now or waiting.

Condo Ignores Condo Authority Tribunal (CAT) Requests to Join Case

architecture buildings business city

Photo by Burst on Pexels.com

A recent CAT decision serves as a good reminder to condominiums of the consequences for refusing to participate in the process.

The owner requested various records from the condominium twice. The condominium had its lawyer respond indicating that it had no obligation to respond because the owner had not used the mandatory form. The lawyer provided a copy of the request form with the letter and indicated that they would respond to the request once it was submitted on the proper form. The owner completed the form and sent a copy via fax to the lawyer and manager. The condominium did not respond so the owner filed a case with the Condominium Authority Tribunal (the “CAT”).

The owner provided notice of the CAT case by courier to the condominium at the management office. The CAT clerk even contacted the condominium twice to ensure they received the notice. The condominium still did not join the case. The condominium did not participate at any point and the process continued without it.

There is an interesting discussion of records requested by the owner that related to a civil action commenced by the condominium against the builder and developer. The action was funded by a special assessment and eventually settled with a payment to the condominium of $1.7 million. The owner was concerned because there was apparently a discrepancy between the settlement amount and the amount received by the condominium ($700,000) so the owner sought an accounting of the amount as well as the settlement agreement. After reviewing sections 55 and 23 of the Act, the CAT member found the owner was entitled to see the settlement agreement.

The CAT ordered the condominium to provide all of the records requested by the owner and pay a penalty of $3,000 for its refusal to provide the records without reasonable excuse. The CAT also awarded the owner costs of $150 (the filing fees paid to the CAT by the owner).

While $3,000 is a significant penalty for many condominiums, I wonder if it is enough incentive for some of the larger condominiums with multi-million dollar budgets. Clearly some are still choosing to ignore record requests by owners (and apparently direct contact from the CAT clerk). What will it take to get them to respond? $10,000? Personal liability on the directors? A summons? Fortunately, most condominiums comply with their obligations when records are requested.

The full case is available on CanLii: https://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncat/doc/2019/2019oncat44/2019oncat44.pdf

Get to Know the Team: Evan Holt

team

Practice Areas

Evan’s practice is divided between assisting declarants acquire land and develop condominium plans and assisting condominium corporations and unit owners with condominium related issues.   Evan’s work includes:

  • reviewing and drafting agreements of purchase and sale;
  • assisting with various matters relating to condominium plan registration;
  • attending and acting as chairperson at condominium meetings;
  • drafting condominium documents (declaration, by-laws, and rules);
  • coordinating the collection of common expenses;
  • negotiating and drafting shared facilities agreements;
  • arranging settlements among condominium corporations, suppliers, or unit owners; and
  • commencing enforcement proceedings against a condominium corporation or unit owner.

Recently, Evan has devoted time to assisting condominium corporations collect arrears of common expenses that are no longer eligible to form the subject matter of a lien.  Evan has found that creative thinking and a willingness to understand the positions of opposing parties is key to any successful resolution.

Involvement

Evan is a former member of the Communications Committee of the Grand River Chapter of the Canadian Condominium Institute.   Evan has written articles that have been published in the Grand River edition of the Condo News and hopes to have more opportunities to have articles published in the future.

Personal

Evan enjoys spending time with his family, friends, and his dog, Bauer.  He is a sports enthusiast and you can often find him watching or participating in live sporting events.

Contact

Evan would be happy to speak with you to discuss any condominium related issue by e-mail or phone.

Get to Know the Team: Daniel Brockenshire

team

Practice Areas

Daniel works with both the condominium management group and the condominium and subdivision development group.

Daniel is currently working with the condominium and subdivision development group on a variety of development projects with clients across Ontario including residential condominiums, commercial condominiums, condominium conversions, and subdivisions. He also chairs turnover meetings for clients’ registered condominium projects.

Recently, Daniel has been spending much of his time with the condominium management group working on borrowing by-laws for condominiums across Ontario as well as amalgamations for condominiums in Waterloo and London. The amalgamation process is time-consuming, but the goal is helping clients achieve significant cost savings within a few years following amalgamation by consolidating previously duplicated costs (ex. reserve fund studies, audited financials, AGMs, service contracts, etc.).

Involvement

Daniel is involved in the Canadian Condominium Institute (CCI) especially the London and Grand River Chapters. You may have seen him recently at one of the conferences enthusiastically recruiting visitors at the firm’s booth to try the golf putting challenge. Keep an eye out for its return at a future conference!

Personal

Daniel enjoys spending time with family and friends and as most major sports seasons have now kicked off – cheering on his beloved Manchester United, Toronto Maple Leafs, and Oakland Raiders. He also loves traveling and recently had a fantastic hiking experience in Cornwall, England.

Contact

E-mail or phone.

For more information, please see the firm’s website: www.rcllp.ca

 

Quiet condo for retirement? Maybe not…

adult age elderly enjoyment

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

A recent case discusses an interesting (and becoming more common) situation where a building is registered as a condominium, but also operated as a retirement home under the Retirement Homes Act, 2010. An action was commenced by certain unit owners against the condominium and various corporations involved in the operation of the retirement home. The owners claimed that the defendants breached the declaration, by-laws, and Retirement Homes Act, 2010, by acting in a discriminatory manner against some of the owners. The owners sought an order that: 1) required the defendants to ensure that at least 2 directors are independent of the defendants; 2) required the defendants to use an agreement that sets out the services program with mandatory fees in accordance with the by-laws; and 3) damages in the amount of $50,000. Continue reading

Is the CAO responsible for creating the forms? Maybe in the near future…

book shelves book stack bookcase books

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

There is a new proposal to have the CAO assume responsibility for 19 forms under the Condominium Act, 1998 and its regulations. The idea is that the proposed changes would “support the condominium community in being able to more easily access and use certain forms under the Condominium Act, 1998.” The proposal is for 17 forms to be delegated to the CAO on January 1, 2020 and 2 additional forms on July 1, 2020. Continue reading

Whose Notice is it Anyway?

038.jpg

The Condominium Act, 1998 provides that an owner is entitled to notice when a condominium corporation takes action to perfect and enforce a lien, however, the recent decision in Mei Ki Ching v Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 203 demonstrates that a spouse that is not a registered owner of a unit may be entitled to the same notice.

Facts

  • McIntosh (the “Owner”) is the sole registered owner of a unit within the condominium plan (the “Unit”);
  • Ching (the “Spouse”) is not a registered owner of the Unit;
  • The Unit was the matrimonial home of the Owner and Spouse;
  • The Owner and Spouse separated in July of 2014;
  • The Owner continued to occupy the unit after separation;
  • In May of 2015, the Spouse registered a designation that the unit was the matrimonial home (the “DMH”);
  • The DMH contained the Spouse’s name and current address;
  • In March of 2017 the Owner defaulted in the Owner’s contributions to the common expenses of the condominium corporation;
  • In March of 2017 the condominium corporation began taking steps to perfect and enforce its lien in accordance with the Condominium Act, 1998;
  • The condominium corporation eventually takes possession of the Unit; and
  • After the condominium corporation took possession of the Unit the Spouse obtained an order granting her exclusive possession of the Unit and vesting the Unit in her name.

The Decision

The Family Law Act, 1990 makes it clear that each spouse has an equal entitlement to the matrimonial home and to give effect to such equal entitlement, a spouse with the right of possession in the matrimonial homes has the same right of redemption or relief against forfeiture as the other spouse and is entitled to the same notice respecting the claim and its enforcement or realization.  The provisions of the Family Law Act, 1990 further required the condominium corporation to provide notice to the Spouse at the usual or last known address of the Spouse or, if none, the address of the matrimonial home.

Despite being aware of the Spouse’s current address because of the registration of the DMH, the condominium corporation failed to provide notice to the Spouse when it took actions to perfect and enforce the lien.

The Court found because reasonable inquiries (in this case, a title search for a nominal fee) by the condominium corporation could have made the name and current address of the Spouse known to the condominium corporation, the condominium corporation was required to provide the Spouse with same notice that was provided to the owner respecting the lien and its enforcement.

Because of the condominium corporation’s failure to provide the required notice, the Court found the lien to be invalid against the Spouse, although the Spouse was required to make certain payments towards common expenses, a special assessment, and late fees.

The Issue for Condominium Corporations Generally

In this case, the DMH provided the condominium corporation with all the information it required to effect proper notice on the Spouse.  Other than a title search, which, absent the registration of a DMH would likely not provide a condominium corporation with the necessary information to determine if there is a spousal interest in the unit, the Court provides no guidance as to what efforts a condominium corporation must take to be considered to have made reasonable inquiries.

Is a condominium corporation to make inquiries of the registered owner? Search marriage records? Contact the lawyer that acted on behalf of the owner when such owner purchased the property?

In the absence of any information about a spouse, will it be sufficient to address all notices to the registered owner and spouse (i.e. John Smith and Spouse) and send them to the unit or the registered owner’s address for service?

There is no doubt reasonable inquiries will depend on the particular circumstances that surround a condominium corporation’s enforcement efforts but, the industry may not get guidance as to when the inquiries of a condominium corporation are reasonable in the circumstances until a similar case is decided.

The New Three P’s?

man riding on motorcycle

Photo by Brett Sayles on Pexels.com

If you live in or work for condominiums you’ve heard of the three p’s: people, pets and parking. These are three of the most common sources of problems in condominiums. (It really boils down to one problem – people – but let’s leave that aside for now.)

Lately, it seems like condominiums are encountering problems related to a new set of p’s: pot, prostitution and petty crime. Here we use “pot” to refer to drug activity generally, “prostitution” to include related crimes like human trafficking, and “petty crime” to refer to other sorts of criminal activity, such as vandalism and bicycle thefts. For some really unfortunate condominiums they experience all three of these at once.  Continue reading