Ontario’s condominium stock is aging. As buildings move into their second, third, and even fourth decades of service, maintenance issues are becoming more frequent, more complex, and more expensive to resolve. Boards and managers understandably focus on fixing the problems in front of them, but an equally important task is often overlooked: keeping clear, contemporaneous records of the maintenance decisions made and the actions taken.

Why Documentation Matters

Maintenance records provide evidence of a corporation’s diligence, decision-making, and compliance. Under the Condominium Act, 1998 (the “Act”), directors are responsible for managing the affairs of a condominium corporation.1 The Act also requires directors and officers to act honestly and in good faith and to exercise the care, diligence, and skill that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances.2

When maintenance disputes arise, the key question is often not whether a problem existed, but whether the corporation responded reasonably. Decision-makers will ask: Was the issue investigated? Was appropriate expert advice obtained? Did the corporation take reasonable steps to meet its repair and maintenance obligations under the Act?3

In answering these questions, contemporaneous records can be critical. Work orders, inspection logs, consultant reports, photographs, emails, notices, and board minutes help establish what information was available, what decisions were made, and what actions were taken.

Documentation and the Standard of Reasonableness

Ontario courts generally assess condominium maintenance decisions using a reasonableness standard informed by the business judgment rule. Courts recognize that boards are often better positioned than judges to make maintenance decisions and will generally defer to informed decisions made honestly and in good faith.4 In practice, this means boards are more likely to receive judicial deference when they can demonstrate a reasonable, well-documented decision-making process.

Contemporaneous records can show that the board identified relevant concerns, weighed competing interests, and followed a fair and transparent process, demonstrating that its decision fell within a range of reasonable choices.5

What the Case Law Tells Us

In Berman v. York Condominium Corporation No. 99, 2021 ONSC 6500, an owner repeatedly raised concerns over several years about a draft and temperature differential near a bedroom window and sought relief on an oppression theory. The corporation inspected the window on multiple occasions, obtained a consultant’s review, completed maintenance such as re-caulking, and ultimately replaced the window through its established window replacement program. Reviewing the corporation’s conduct and maintenance history, the court concluded that the corporation had acted reasonably, had not ignored the owner’s concerns, and had responded within the range of acceptable options available to it. The oppression application was dismissed.6

In Weir v. Peel Condominium Corporation No. 485, 2017 ONSC 6265, an owner reported recurring water infiltration over a period of years and pressed the corporation to identify the source and implement an effective solution. The corporation retained engineers, conducted extensive testing, and undertook multiple remediation steps as it worked through what proved to be a complex, weather-dependent problem. The court assessed the corporation’s documented investigative and remediation process, including its reliance on expert input, and found that it had acted reasonably in the circumstances despite the persistence of the problem.7

In Wu v. Peel Condominium Corporation No. 245, 2015 ONSC 2801, an owner made ongoing complaints about persistent noise and vibration affecting her unit. Although the corporation investigated and obtained expert reports recommending remedial work, it failed to implement key recommendations in a timely and meaningful way. The court focused on the gap between investigation and follow-through, found that the corporation had failed to meet its maintenance obligations, and awarded damages.8

Together, these decisions show that courts look at both process and execution. A condominium corporation is not expected to solve every maintenance issue immediately or perfectly. It is, however, expected to investigate concerns reasonably, obtain appropriate expert advice where necessary, make informed decisions, and act on those decisions within a reasonable timeframe. Documentation is what allows a corporation to prove it did exactly that.

Best Practices for Boards and Managers

To strengthen a corporation’s ability to demonstrate diligence and reasonableness, boards and managers should:

• Document complaints promptly. Record when concerns are raised, the nature of the issue, and the steps taken in response.
• Maintain detailed maintenance records. Retain work orders, inspection reports, consultant recommendations, photographs, correspondence, and contractor invoices.
• Record key decisions in board minutes. Minutes should reflect the information considered, the expert advice received, and the rationale for significant maintenance and repair decisions.
• Retain expert reports and recommendations. Where engineers, contractors, or other professionals are consulted, their opinions should be preserved and linked to the board decisions that followed.
• Track follow-up actions. Records should show not only what was investigated, but what corrective measures were taken, when they were completed, and the reasons for any delay.
• Keep records organized. Store records so they can be easily retrieved if a dispute arises years later.
• Document communications with owners. Clear, contemporaneous communications help demonstrate that concerns were acknowledged, investigated, and addressed in a reasonable manner.

Conclusion

Maintenance issues are an inevitable part of managing aging condominium communities. Disputes, however, often turn less on the existence of a problem than on whether the corporation responded reasonably to it. As the case law demonstrates, courts are generally prepared to defer to informed and reasonable decision-making where boards investigate concerns, obtain appropriate expert advice, and act on the information available to them.

In that context, maintenance records are more than administrative documents — they are evidence. Comprehensive and contemporaneous documentation can help demonstrate that a corporation acted diligently, fulfilled its statutory obligations, and exercised reasonable judgment in addressing maintenance challenges. As Berman, Weir, and Wu illustrate, documentation alone may not determine the outcome of a dispute, but it often provides the foundation upon which a corporation’s reasonableness is assessed.

Mordy Mednick is a partner in Dickinson Wright’s Commercial Litigation Group with a particular focus on condominium law and litigation disputes. As a partner, Mordy has frequently attended before the Ontario Court of Appeal and the Ontario Superior Court of Justice and conducted numerous trials, motions and mediations.
Véronique Knapp is with Dickinson Wright LLP. Prior to pursuing her legal career, Véronique earned a Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in Political Studies with Distinction and a Certificate in Law from Queen’s University.
www.dickinson-wright.com/our-firm/locations/toronto-office-canada
1.    Condominium Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 19, s. 27(1).
2.    Condominium Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 19, s. 37(1).
3.    Condominium Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 19, ss. 17(1)–(3), 27(1), 37(1), (3).
4.    3716724 Canada Inc. v. Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 375, 2016 ONCA 650 at paras. 52–55; Condominium Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 19, ss. 27(1), 37(1).
5.    3716724 Canada Inc. v. Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 375, 2016 ONCA 650 at paras. 53–55.
6.    Berman v. York Condominium Corporation No. 99, 2021 ONSC 6500 at paras. 4–9, 19, 22–25, 28–30, 34–41.
7.    Weir v. Peel Condominium Corporation No. 485, 2017 ONSC 6265 at paras. 3–5, 22–55, 57–67, 113–130, 159–161.
8.  Wu v. Peel Condominium Corporation No. 245, 2015 ONSC 2801 at paras. 10–21, 22–63, 150–172, 173–177.
 

View PDF View Flipbook Back to Latest Issue