chapter previous next
Residental units turned into commercial units
York Condominium Corporation
No. 82 v. Singh
File No. CV-12-448324
20 to 22, 2013
family that was selling alcohol and cigarettes out of their residential
unit was ordered to sell their unit and are exiled from the condo
is an interesting case as it shows the high costs of ignoring a court
order, the duties of a corporation to enforce the Act, the Declaration,
its bylaws and its rules and the amount of time and effort required to
get the necessary evidence to win a court case.
February 2013, YCC # 82 was successful in getting a court judgment
forcing the owners of Unit 149, 4645 Jane Street to vacate and sell
their unit because they ignored an earlier court order to stop selling
beer and cigarettes out of their residential unit.
Spence states: “A finding of contempt of court is a serious matter that
is quasi-criminal in nature. It is “first and foremost a
declaration that a party has acted in defiance of a court order”. This
is a very serious matter as a person found in contempt of court can be
To be found in contempt, a three-pronged test is required:
|the order that was breached
must state clearly and unequivocally what should and should not be done.
|the party who disobeys the
order must do so deliberately and willfully.
|the evidence must show
contempt beyond a reasonable doubt.
corporation’s security staff and hired private investigators monitored
the activities of the people going in and out of Unit # 149 and backed
this up with video and photographic evidence. The evidence showed that
respondents were continuing to sell beer in defiance of the court order.
Violation of the
# 82 also claimed that the unit owners were in breach of sections 117
& 134 of the Condominium Act and the corporation’s Declaration and
Rules. The Declaration for YCC #82 states that the units are to be used
as a residence for a single family and for no other purpose.
the Respondents bought the unit, there has been a continuous and steady
stream of human traffic in and out of the unit and around the unit.
Unit owners and others have stated that the respondents are selling
selling of alcohol by the Respondents and the consumption in public
areas of alcohol apparently purchased in such sales are creating
problems at YCC #82 and creating a situation of danger and an unsafe
environment. There have been disorderly activities. The police
have attended at the unit on several occasions.
security officer at the condo testified that there is continuous
traffic in and around the Unit; many of the individuals do not live at
YCC #82. The selling of beer is creating an unsafe environment
and it appears to be creating an environment where others think that
they can now sell such things out of their units. We are
currently investigating Unit #337 where we understand beer is now being
Evidence from the property management showed that the respondents
ignored all requests to stop selling alcohol.
Spence stated that YCC #82 is under a positive obligation to take all
reasonable steps to enforce the Act and the Corporation’s Declaration,
By-laws and Rules and that all Unit Owners and Occupants (among others)
must comply with the Act, Declaration, By-Laws and Rules of the
Justice Robert J. Spence also
wrote that where
it can be established that an owner’s misconduct is serious and
persistent and where the impact on a small community has been
exceptional and where the Respondent appears to be incorrigible or
unmanageable, the Court may order a unit owner of a corporation to list
and sell their unit.
Singh, has been engaged in selling beer at YCC 82 since the Order of
Justice Stinson of January 2011 and all three residents were found in
contempt of court.
three residents were also found to be in breach of Rule 28 of the Rules
and Regulations of YCC #82 that require owners and occupants not to do
anything that “will annoy or disturb or interfere in any way with other
owners or other occupant or those having business with them”.
The following relief was granted in favour of the corporation:
|Namita Singh was fined
$10,000, payable within 30 days.
|Nutan Singh and Narayan Sundar
Singh each were fined $2,500.00, payable within 30 days.
|Nutan Singh, Narayan Sundar
Singh and Namita Singh are required to sell
and vacate their unit within three months, are barred from YCC #82 and
are barred from owning any units in YCC #82. They must also pay the
corporation’s legal costs of $32,462.81.The total amount shall be
payable within 90 days.
respondents are required to pay a total of $47,462.81 plus their own
legal costs. That is close to the listing value of the units for sale
On top of that they had to have paid
the corporation’s court fees from the first court case and they will
now have to pay real estate fees, moving costs and their real estate
lawyer fees. I have some doubt that the corporation will recover all
their costs as the owners may declare bankruptcy. If they have a
mortgage, the mortgagee will get nothing.