Skip to content

Narrow screen resolution Wide screen resolution Auto adjust screen size Increase font size Decrease font size Default font size default color brick color green color
CAFCOR Forum
_GEN_GOTOBOTTOM Post Reply
TOPIC:
#18986
LIEN withstands SHORT- NOTICE COMPUTATION challenges; LAWYER’S unit CAN BE SEIZED- CCC 476 v Wong 2019/08/02 23:19  
Not a legal opinion.

( update April 3/20 : Amidst covod-19 suspensions, lien challenger/lawyer XXX fails to get ONCA Ontario's Court of Appeal to postpone considering execution of July 2019 summary judgment rendered against him despite some interesting defence arguments last year. ONCA now orders owner/lawyer XXX's appeal to proceed by remote adjudication of written submissions. Carleton C.C. # 476 v Wong 2020 ONCA 244 issued April 3/20 http://canlii.ca/t/j6bsq )

* *

3 and a half years after Ottawa's Carleton Condo Corporation C.C.C. # 476 filed a Statement of Claim to get payment of arrears or to exercise mortgagee remedies allowed by Ontario Condo Act 1998’s s 85 under a Lien for arrears issued Jan 31/14, it finally gets summary judgment for action.

The judgment strikes down defences that include claiming the Lien ( and therefor the drastic mortgagee remedies sought here & additional charges collectible ) is allegedly invalidated by “short notice” !

( ? Shockingly ? ) the defender is longtime owner Toronto lawyer XXX whose refusals to pay are said to have generated SIX previous LIENS onto title of his 7th floor unit.

It is /was a unit in a spartan-looking 9 storey building just west of “Mechanicsville” at 35 Holland Ave just south of Tunneys Pasture civil service complex. Now presumably it's more feasible to action the Lien amidst condo demand in gentrifying "Wellington West Village" etc ).

Justice Marc R. Labrosse strikes down lawyer–owner XXX‘s central objection alleging the Lien is invalidated by short-Notice to Owner.

Rules that the requirement is NOT ( TEN ) CLEAR DAYS separating mailing date & consequential date on which Lien would be earliest be filed if not pre-empted by full payments.

Ruling cites :

1 - express wording of Condo Act 1998’s s 85 (4 )
Lien upon default
85
. . Notice to owner
(4) At least 10 days before the day a certificate of lien is registered, the corporation shall give written notice of the lien to the owner whose unit is affected by the lien. 1998, c. 19, s. 85 (4); AND

2 - Mildly obscure Legislation Act 2006 S.O. 2006 chapter 21 Schedule F

( section 89 ) Computation of time

" . . . . . Number of days between events
(3) A reference to a number of days between two events excludes the day on which the first event happens and includes the day on which the second event happens, even if the reference is to “at least”or “not less than” a number of days. "

( Note : It is theoretically possible that the narrower formula derived from the above - in certain cases - could actually allow the owner in arrears MORE THAN 10 clear days for pre-empting the Lien
. Respectfully it isn't necessarily anti-debtor, but this of course ain't legal advice either. Such interpretation better derives from a legislated source arguably few might have recognized before this recent judgment . . . )

Carleton C.C. # 476 v Wong 2019 ONSC 4207 issued July 10/19 http://canlii.ca/t/j1kbb
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
#19067
ONCA rejects lawyer-owner's SHORT NOTICE & VICARIOUS TENANTING claims; free to seize CCC 476 v Wong 2020/04/26 17:11  
Not legal advice, as usual

Amidst covid-19 deaths & postponement of non-urgent adjudication activity, an ONCA Ontario Court of Appeal panel has rejected a lawyer/owner's appeal against an upheld LIEN ( lucky # 7th lien reportedly ). Such leaves the door open to the condo corporation's mortgage-style remedies including Power of Sale.

ONCA here rejects lawyer XXX’s computation & vicarious claims w.r.t. a former Superintendent. Confirms that Ontario's somewhat obscure Legislation Act 2006 trumps lawyer XXX's “CLEAR DAYS” formula.

And his accompanying vicarious ( negligent private tenanting ) claim involving an ex-Superintendent, is again ruled both untimely & unproven.

If lawyer XXX wants to go further, Canada's Supreme Court has been rejecting well over 90 % of leave applications.

And thankfully civil appeals to the Judicial Committee of Britain's Privy Council were abolished in 1949 . . .

Carleton C.C. # 476 v Wong (2020) ONCA 263 issued April 22/20 http://canlii.ca/t/j6lqf

postcript June 11/20

ONCA awards further $ 16.8 K all inclusive in this appeal against lawyer XXX : Carleton C.C. # 476 v Wong (2020) ONCA 363 issued June 9/20 http://canlii.ca/t/j8597
  The administrator has disabled public write access.
_GEN_GOTOTOP Post Reply
contact webmaster