CONDOMINIUM
AUTHORITY TRIBUNAL
MOTION ORDER
DATE: August 20, 2019
CASE: 2019-00026R
Citation: Nicholaos Nassios v Grey Standard Condominium Corporation No. 46, 2019 ONCAT 30
Order under section 1.44 of the Condominium Act, 1998.
Member: Laurie Sanford, Member
|
The Applicant Nicholaos Nassios |
Self-Represented |
|
The Respondent Grey Standard Condominium Corporation No. 46
|
Robert Weinberg, Agent |
MOTION DECISION AND ORDER
A. BACKGROUND
[1] On June 20, 2019, the Tribunal released its Decision and Order (the “Dismissal Order”) on a Motion to Dismiss Mr. Nassios’ application for records from Grey Standard Condominium Corporation No. 46 (“GSCC46”). The motion was granted and Mr. Nassios’ application was dismissed on the grounds that he had sold his condominium unit and, therefore, had lost his status to request records from GSCC46.
[2] On July 19, 2019, Mr. Nassios brought a motion (the “1st Correction Motion”) to correct or clarify the June 20th Decision under Rule 30 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice. In the decision on that motion, released to the parties on August 7, 2019, I decided that I did not have the jurisdiction to make the clarifications and corrections that Mr. Nassios requested.
[3] On August 7, the Dismissal Order was published on CanLII, in accordance with section 2 of Regulation 179/17 to the Condominium Act, 1998.
[4] On August 9, 2019, Mr. Nassios brought this motion, (the “2nd Correction Motion”) asking me to reconsider my decision on the 1st Correction Motion and asking for the Tribunal to work with him to correct what he perceives as incorrect statements of fact and misrepresentations of certain positions he took during the hearing.
B. DECISION
[5] For the reasons set out in my Decision on the 1st Correction Motion, I decided that I did not have the jurisdiction to make the clarifications and corrections that Mr. Nassios requested at that time. I concluded that the changes Mr. Nassios requested were more substantive than permitted by Rule 30 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and that no other rule or statutory provision operated to give me the necessary jurisdiction.
[6] In this 2nd Correction Motion, Mr. Nassios submitted that additional matters require correction but these proposed changes are also more substantive than the minor corrections and changes to Orders permitted under Rule 30 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice. Accordingly, they too are beyond my jurisdiction to address.
[7] Mr. Nassios requests that I reconsider my earlier decision and that Tribunal work with him to correct what he perceives as inaccuracies and misrepresentations. It is important to note that questions of jurisdiction are not discretionary. The lack of jurisdiction in this matter acts as a legal barrier to the relief Mr. Nassios requests. It is a barrier I cannot overlook. I cannot set it aside, even if I were persuaded that misstatements of fact and misrepresentations of Mr. Nassios’ positions had been made.
[8] It is important to note that Mr. Nassios requested that any corrections occur before the Dismissal Order was posted online. On August 7, 2019, the Dismissal Order was posted on CanLII. Therefore, this matter is now moot.
C. ORDER
[9] The Tribunal orders that this motion be denied.
____________________________________
Laurie Sanford
Member, Condominium Authority Tribunal
Released on: August 20, 2019