Understanding the Condominium Authority Tribunal’s Jurisdiction on Harassment Issues
The Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) handles a range of disputes related to condominium living, including issues about records, pets, parking, and nuisance-related matters, as outlined in Regulation 179/17. But what happens when the issue involves harassment? Can the CAT step in?
A recent case, Dambremont v. Cochrane Condominium Corporation No. 7, provides some clarity on this question. The Tribunal ultimately determined that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the harassment complaint, based on Section 117(1) of the Condominium Act, which excludes certain matters from the Tribunal’s scope.
What is Section 117(1) of the Condominium Act?
Section 117(1) states:
No person shall, through an act or omission, cause a condition to exist or an activity to take place in a unit, the common elements, or the assets of the corporation that is likely to damage property or cause injury or illness to an individual.
This provision is critical when considering whether harassment complaints fall within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. In this case, the Applicant had filed a harassment claim against other unit owners and members of the condominium’s board of directors. While the Tribunal initially seemed open to addressing the issue, it raised a preliminary jurisdictional question and invited submissions on whether the matter fell under its authority.
The Tribunal’s Findings
The Applicant argued that harassment was addressed in the condominium’s governing documents, including the rules, which would bring the case under the Tribunal’s mandate as a matter of nuisance. The Tribunal initially appeared receptive to this argument, but during the proceedings, the Applicant disclosed that the alleged harassment caused her emotional distress, leading her to feel fearful and call the police. It was also revealed that the harassment had a negative impact on the Applicant’s physical and psychological health.
Based on this evidence, the Tribunal concluded that the harassment allegations were not simply nuisance-related but also involved potential emotional and psychological harm. As such, the matter fell under the scope of Section 117(1) of the Act, which deals with issues of harm or injury, and therefore, was outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.
Key Takeaways
This case highlights an important distinction: if a harassment claim involves emotional or psychological harm, the Tribunal may rule that the matter falls under Section 117(1) and is therefore outside its jurisdiction. In such cases, the proper forum for resolution may be a court, not the Tribunal.
Additionally, the Tribunal did not award costs to either party, as it determined that the Applicant had not acted improperly but had mistakenly believed the CAT had jurisdiction over the matter.
What Does This Mean for Condo Owners and Residents?
Jurisdictional issues in CAT proceedings can be complex, and sometimes, they are not fully resolved until the end of the case, even after a preliminary hearing. To help ensure your case is heard in the right forum, it’s important to come prepared with clear and organized evidence—especially when the issue of jurisdiction is raised early on in the process.
For those navigating similar disputes, staying informed about the latest developments in condominium law can help you better understand the legal framework and where to direct your claims.
Be sure to keep up with Condo Law News for updates on these important legal topics!
November 6, 2024 | Sophie Ryder Condo Law
