DHA Condo Law – August 14, 2024
Your condominium’s governing documents likely contain clauses that give the owners the right to enjoy their units with limited noise disturbances. But what can count as an unreasonable noise disturbance?
Three recent Condominium Authority Tribunal decisions, Peel Condominium Corporation No. 112 v. Uthayachandran et al, Kimel v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2026 and Park v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2775 have further clarified what constitutes a noise disturbance including:
- Other owners’/tenants’ consistent noisy behaviour late at night.
- Excessive noise from Garage doors.
- Noise made after hours at the gym and particularly due to misuse of equipment.
In Peel Condominium Corporation No. 112, the Tribunal ordered an Owner to stop creating loud noises such as yelling, shouting, jumping, banging, slamming doors, and playing loud music after other residents complained. The Tribunal mainly focused on the time of day at which the noise was being made, with several of the complainants testifying the noise was occurring at night and interfering with their ability to sleep. The tribunal found that the noise and disruption to the other owners’ quiet enjoyment in the evening was substantial and unreasonable. The Tribunal also ordered 60% of the condominium corporation’s costs to be paid by the Respondent.
Both Kimel and Park deal with condo units located above a noise source. In Kimel, the Applicant’s unit was directly above the garage door for the underground parking garage, and she complained that the noise and vibration from the door opening and closing could be heard and felt in her unit every few minutes. The Tribunal found the noise and vibration were an unreasonable continuing annoyance. It is important to note that the condominium’s own expert report appears to have confirmed that the noise from the garage door was “beyond a level that is reasonably expected to be experienced within a residential unit.” In other words, while some noise from the operation of building systems is to be expected in a condominium setting, the noise in this case exceeded objectively reasonable levels to the point where it was regularly intrusive and unsuitable in a residential setting. The Tribunal ordered the condominium corporation to replace the garage door system with a quieter system.
In Park, the Tribunal ruled that noise coming from the gym, caused by misuse of equipment, below the Applicant’s unit constituted an unreasonable annoyance and disruption.
Part of the complaint concerned people using the gym outside the gym’s hours of operation as permitted by the Rules. The Tribunal found that the Applicant knew the unit he purchased was above the gym and would result in some noise. However, that did not mean he was required to live with unreasonable noise. The tribunal found the noise was unreasonable and affected his quiet enjoyment of the unit.
The takeaway is that any noise is not automatically unreasonable; other factors, such as time of day, frequency, consistency of the noise, failure to limit misuse by other owners, and failure to disclose any possible noise at purchase, can all factor into determining whether or not a particular noise is unreasonable, as highlighted in the cases above.
