19 janvier - Un copropriétaire l'a récemment échappé belle, en Ontario, à l'issue d'une poursuite intentée contre lui par son syndicat. Ce dernier souhaitait forcer la vente de son appartement pour pouvoir l'évincer de l'immeuble, en raison de ses comportements qualifiés d'inadmissibles par la collectivié des copropriétaires qui y vivent.
Il faut dire que le copropriétaire en question contrevenait aux articles 117 et 119 du Condominium Act, en vigueur depuis plusieurs années dans cette province. Ses comportements inappropriés et répétitifs indisposaient les autres occupants, qui ont porté plainte contre lui à moult reprises entre 2003 et 2006. Après avoir reçu plusieurs avis le sommant de corriger la situation, l'homme a obtempéré, mais il s'est mis à récidiver à compter de 2010.
À titre d'exemple, il n'hésite pas à jeter la litière de son chat sur les terrains communs de la copropriété, depuis son balcon. À une occassion, des matières fécales animales sont tombées sur la tête d'un entrepreneur qui procédait à des travaux sur le site. Le copropriétaire délinquant a également installé une moustiquaire sur son balcon, ce qui est interdit par sa déclaration de copropriété. En outre, il a pris l'initiative de déplacer un fauteuil qui se trouvait dans le lobby, sans en obtenir le consentement préalable par ses administrateurs.
D'autres gestes lui sont reprochés, soit celui d'avoir lancé un escabot sur la résidence du gestionnaire de la copropriété, d'avoir proféré des menaces et injurié ce même gestionnaire à plusieurs reprises, ainsi que les résidents de l'immeuble. Qu'à cela ne tienne, le juge a estimé que les motifs invoqués pour le contraindre à vendre son appartement étaient insuffisants. Il a référé à une cause (Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 747 v. Korolekh) qui fait jurisprudence en cette matière en Ontario.
En revanche, le copropriétaire fautif a du payer la "miroblante" somme de 169.50 $ en guise d'amende, et s'est vu interdire de jeter la litière de son chat par le balcon. De plus, il devra dorénavant se conformer au Condominium Act et à la déclaration de copropriété, éviter de tenir des propos intimidants et injurieux à l'égard d'autrui dans la copropriété, et s'engager à ne plus enfreindre les règles établies, afin de ne pas entraver le droit qu'ont les autres copropriétaires et occupants à pouvoir jouir pleinement des lieux.
Les cas d'évictions de copropriétaires sont rares en Ontario, la cour préférant leur accorder la chance de changer leur comportement, avant d'en arriver à la solution ultime. Précisons que le Code civil du Québec prévoit des dispositions permettant d'évincer les copropriétaires indésirables d'une copropriété.
Montréal, le 19 janveir 2014
Source: Condo Reporter
In a recent case, Peel Condominium Corporation No. 98 v. Pereira, a condominium corporation made a court application pursuant to section 117 of the Condominium Act (the “Act”) seeking an order that a unit owner be required to sell and vacate his unit, due to the manner in which the unit owner had conducted himself over a number of years. There were numerous complaints about this owner going back to 2003. During the period between 2003 and 2006, management wrote a number of letters to the owner on various issues, all of which appeared to have been rectified.
Starting in 2010, there were a number of new issues concerning this owner’s behaviour on the condominium property, including the following:
The court determined that the owner did, in fact, throw cat litter and feces and that the unit owner had behaved in an inappropriate and abusive manner, including the use of threatening and offensive language. The court further concluded that the owner had breached sections 117 and 119(i) of the Act.
However, after reviewing the case law and, in particular, the landmark case of Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 747 v. Korolekh, the judge determined that the unit owner’s behaviour fell short of what was required in order to grant the corporation an order requiring that the unit owner sell his unit. (The court also declined to order that the owner’s cat be removed from the property – it certainly was not the cat that was throwing the litter and feces over the balcony!)
Instead, the court imposed the following orders on the unit owner:
No doubt the condominium corporation was disappointed in not being able to get an order requiring that the owner be required to sell his unit. Cases of this nature are very fact specific. As a court order requiring that a unit be sold is considered to be an extraordinary remedy to be used only rare cases, it appears that in some cases the courts are willing to give owners a chance to “clean up their act” and behave appropriately and comply before being ordered to sell their unit.
- See more at: https://www.condoreporter.com/getting-rid-of-a-difficult-condominium-unit-owner/#sthash.SQEZGRCQ.dpufIn a recent case, Peel Condominium Corporation No. 98 v. Pereira, a condominium corporation made a court application pursuant to section 117 of the Condominium Act (the “Act”) seeking an order that a unit owner be required to sell and vacate his unit, due to the manner in which the unit owner had conducted himself over a number of years. There were numerous complaints about this owner going back to 2003. During the period between 2003 and 2006, management wrote a number of letters to the owner on various issues, all of which appeared to have been rectified.
Starting in 2010, there were a number of new issues concerning this owner’s behaviour on the condominium property, including the following:
The court determined that the owner did, in fact, throw cat litter and feces and that the unit owner had behaved in an inappropriate and abusive manner, including the use of threatening and offensive language. The court further concluded that the owner had breached sections 117 and 119(i) of the Act.
However, after reviewing the case law and, in particular, the landmark case of Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 747 v. Korolekh, the judge determined that the unit owner’s behaviour fell short of what was required in order to grant the corporation an order requiring that the unit owner sell his unit. (The court also declined to order that the owner’s cat be removed from the property – it certainly was not the cat that was throwing the litter and feces over the balcony!)
Instead, the court imposed the following orders on the unit owner:
No doubt the condominium corporation was disappointed in not being able to get an order requiring that the owner be required to sell his unit. Cases of this nature are very fact specific. As a court order requiring that a unit be sold is considered to be an extraordinary remedy to be used only rare cases, it appears that in some cases the courts are willing to give owners a chance to “clean up their act” and behave appropriately and comply before being ordered to sell their unit.
- See more at: https://www.condoreporter.com/getting-rid-of-a-difficult-condominium-unit-owner/#sthash.SQEZGRCQ.dpuf
