Related Decisions and Orders

Other legal bodies, such as the Ontario Superior Court of Justice or the Ontario Divisional Court, may issue a decision or order relating to previously issued CAT decisions or orders. These often relate to the enforcement or appeal of a Tribunal decision or order. Details of full decisions and orders reported to the CAT are available from the Condominium Authority of Ontario or the Canadian Legal Information Institute.

Hackman v. TSCC No. 1978, 2023 ONSC 5566 (CanLII)

• The Respondent appealed the CAT’s decision in Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1978 v. Hackman, 2022 ONCAT 143, arguing that the Tribunal failed to provide adequate reasons and failed to consider the Tribunal’s Rules when awarding costs. The Divisional Court found that the Tribunal’s reasons were sufficient, and that the award of costs was discretionary, was based on the application of the appropriate principles, and disclosed no error in law. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay $5,000 in costs to Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1978.

Peel Standard Condominium Corp. No. 779 v. Rahman, 2023 ONSC 3758 (CanLII)

• The Respondent appealed the CAT’s decision in Peel Standard Condominium Corp. No. 779 v. Rahman, 2023 ONSC 3758, arguing that the Tribunal had made several legal errors, including that the Tribunal made an incorrect ruling regarding its jurisdiction, had erred by issuing an order requiring the corporation to pay damages, and had erroneously applied principles from the Superior Court of Justice’s decision in Amlani v. York Condominium Corporation No. 473, 2020 ONSC 194. The Divisional Court found that the Tribunal had not made any errors of law and dismissed the appeal without costs.

Edith Gagnon v. Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 331

• The Applicant appealed the CAT’s decision in Gagnon v. Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 331, 2021 ONCAT 56, arguing that the Tribunal had made several errors. The Divisional Court found that the appellant had not identified any error of law and that she was instead challenging findings of fact and mixed findings of fact and law, which the court does not have jurisdiction to review. The Court dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to pay $8,500 in legal costs to her condo corporation.

Sarros v. York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1445

• The Applicant appealed the CAT’s decision requiring him to remove a structure from his balcony in Sarros v. York Region Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1445, 2021 ONCAT 86. The Divisional Court found that the Tribunal had properly considered the material evidence and that the appellant had not identified any error of law. The Court dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to pay $3,000 in legal costs to his condo corporation.

Halton Standard Condominium Corporation No. 617 v. Linda Roberts

• The Respondent appealed the CAT’s decision requiring it to pay $200 in CAT fees to the Applicant in Roberts v. Halton Standard Condominium Corporation No. 617 and Yamine, 2021 ONCAT 21. The Divisional Court found that the Tribunal had erred in law by ordering the condo corporation to reimburse the unit owner after finding that the condo corporation was the successful party. The Court set aside the CAT’s costs order.

Peel Standard Condominium Corporation No. 779 v. Rahman, 2021 ONSC 7113 (CanLII)

• The Respondent filed an application for judicial review of the CAT’s decision in Rahman v. Peel Standard Condominium Corporation No. 779, 2021 ONCAT 13 to Divisional Court. The Court dismissed the application for judicial review because of an existing statutory right of appeal (set out in Section 1.46 of the Condo Act) which the respondent had not pursued. The Court was also not satisfied that there were exceptional reasons to interfere with the decision by way of judicial review.

Kong v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1959

• The Applicant appealed the CAT’s decision to dismiss the case in Kong v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1959, 2021 ONCAT 18 to Divisional Court. The Court ordered that the CAT’s decision be set aside and the case be remitted to the CAT to resolve the remaining disputed issues. The Divisional Court order specifically notes that the Court has not passed any judgement on the CAT’s interpretation of sections 1.36 (6) and (7) of the Condo Act in the CAT’s original decision. The CAT has since released its decision in this case: Kong v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1959, 2021 ONCAT 96.

Gale v. Halton Condominium Corporation No. 61, 2020 ONSC 5896 (CanLII)

• Halton Condominium Corporation No. 61 appealed the CAT’s decision in Jack Gale v Halton Condominium Corporation No. 61, 2019 ONCAT 46 (CanLII), arguing that the CAT, in reaching its decision, had misapplied Section 1.46(2) of the Condo Act, whereby a party involved in a CAT case can appeal the CAT’s decision to Divisional Court on a question of law. The Court found that the CAT had not made an error in law so it upheld the CAT’s decision and dismissed the appeal.

Tharani Holdings Inc. v. Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 812, 2020 ONSC 189 (CanLII)

• Tharani Holdings Inc. applied to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to enforce compliance with a CAT order (Tharani Holdings Inc. v. Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 812, 2019 ONCAT 3 (CanLII)). The Court ordered MTCC No. 812 to pay Tharani Holdings Inc. $14,715.91 in costs.