Not legal advice as usual.

Respectfully some food for Director thought :

Toronto Star real property law columnist lawyer BOB AARON has just discussed a 5 month old section 135 OPPRESSION RULING & costs imposed on a 341 unit Ontario highrise condo corporation.

The text of the ( late November 2022 ONSC Superior Court of Justice ) ruling may even tempt to suggest that a departing PMC property manager - with or without board approval but against the client such getting treated not exculpatory - laid on what was adjudicated unreasonably harsh & short reno conditions.

That's in imposing ( tight ) restrictions to have maximum 20 minute service elevator & quick completion of the incoming Applicant resale buyer's plan to reno the kitchen & bathroom. ( "you gotta finish in 4 days " ) That's well BEFORE moving in.

4 day job ( ? ) with two 20 minute reservations / 341 units highrise . Do renos usually work like that ?

In perspective a 341 unit highrise has lots of complications. And huge elevator demand and maybe breakdowns. AND who know how many other unit renos and ESSENTIAL common element repairs ! And more stress for a manager if short-staffed or heading toward a change of management. No bed of roses.

BUT here the Applicant resale buyer was early & savvy & under a tight enough schedule to lawyer up quickly.

( ? Surprisingly ? ) bothering to get this and succesfully getting the Order & award took only 11 months from the first approaching for elevator access / components to go 'in & out' . The condo corp is hit for 100 % of alternative occupancy costs for 192 days ( $ 34 K as ‘special damages ) and half ( $ 15 K ) of the incoming owner's legal bill.

Several leading Ontario alleged oppressions (topics elsewhere at cafcor) have been 2003 McKinstry ( shriekers' quicky demands get refused ) and 2020 Noguera ( consent gets retracted oppressively ).

Section 135 OPPRESSION REMEDY looks not easy to get against reasonable governance decisions. Not so hard used against individual owners found troublesome enough . Especially not legal advice.

The decision : Moran v P.C.C. # 485 (2022) ONSC 6539 issued Nov 21/22 https://canlii.ca/t/jt3z3

April 29/23 print edition Toronto Star ( initially requires subscription ) “ Condo board penalized for failing to act reasonably” https://www.thestar.com/life/homes/analysis/2023/04/29/condo-board-penalized-for-failing-to-act- reasonably-on-owners-renovation-request.html

More B Aaron articles : https://www.aaron.ca/toronto-star-columns/

now available online at lawyer Bob Aaron's past columns website

https://www.aaron.ca/condo-board-penalized-for-failing-to-act-reasonably-on-owners-renovation- request/

( and it's always worth a stroll through his previous columns.

eg years ago how a TSSA - complying, bylaw-compliant detached home CHIMNEY - without a single molecule of change - suddenly became non-compliant when a city permit was issued and resultant nextdoor chimney got built ! . . . . . . Only in Toronto does one think ? )