CONDOMINIUM AUTHORITY TRIBUNAL
DATE: August 29, 2023
CASE: 2023-00368N
Citation: Popkov v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2226, 2023 ONCAT 120
Order under section 1.41 of the Condominium Act, 1998.
Member: Ian Darling, Chair
The Applicant,
Sergey Popkov
Self-Represented
The Respondent,
Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2226
DISMISSAL ORDER
[1] The Applicant filed an application with the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) on July 6, 2023. The CAT identified concerns with its jurisdiction. The Tribunal sent a Notice of Intent to Dismiss the Application. The Notice identified the problems with the Application, and asked the Applicant to explain if it should, or should not be dismissed. I have reviewed the Applicant’s response. It did not resolve the problems with the Application. This Order outlines the reasons for dismissing the case.
[2] Under the CAT Rules, the CAT can close a case if it has no legal power to hear or decide upon the dispute. The CAT’s jurisdiction is established by the Ontario Government. Ontario Regulation 179/17 contains the specific wording of the jurisdiction. The CAT does not have the legal authority to decide issues that are outside its jurisdiction.
[3] This application was filed as a dispute about the condominium corporation’s governing documents and / or an unreasonable nuisance, annoyance, or disruption. The Application is not about unreasonable nuisance, annoyance or disruption that are prohibited, restricted or otherwise governed by the declaration, by-laws or rules of the corporation.
[4] The Applicant alleges that the board of directors for Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2226 (“TSCC 2226”) is attempting to use the money from the reserve fund to refurbish the common elements. The Applicant argues that the refurbishment does not constitute a major repair or replacement and that the board should not use money from the reserve fund.
[5] The Applicant further claims that the board did not comply with section 97 of the Condominium Act, 1998 (the “Act”). The Applicant argues that the board did not provide notice to the unit owners about the proposed project and did not consult with or seek approval from the owners.
[6] The Applicant was informed by the CAT that the dispute appeared to be outside of the CAT’s jurisdiction as the issues in dispute related to the use of the reserve fund and compliance with section 97 of the Act.
[7] The Applicant was given a chance to clarify how the issues related to the CAT’s jurisdiction. The Applicant maintained that the dispute was about the corporation’s non-compliance with section 97 of the Act and provisions of the condominium corporation’s declaration and by-laws which govern the use of the reserve fund, modification of the comment elements and the board’s standard of care.
[8] The Tribunal has no power to hear, or make orders about disputes with respect to section 97. Accordingly, the Applicant’s issues in dispute are outside of the CAT’s jurisdiction. I order that this case be dismissed.
ORDER
[9] The Tribunal orders the Application dismissed.
|
|
|
Ian Darling |
|
|
Chair, Condominium Authority Tribunal |
||
Released on: August 29, 2023