Pot smoker has licence to light up
Under human rights code, corporation has no right to prevent medical treatment
I am a disabled, licensed marijuana smoker. There is no rule or declaration provision preventing smoking on balconies. Must I comply with the condominium manager’s demand that I must stop? A declaration or rule prohibition, even if one exists, would be subject to the human rights code requiring the condominium corporation to accommodate your disability. If the licence establishes on the basis of medical evidence that you have a disability requiring treatment by the smoking of marijuana, the corporation is not entitled to prevent that treatment.
I am renting my townhouse condominium to a person with a visual disability. I put up an orange mailbox so that the tenant would be able to more easily distinguish his condo from neighbouring condos. I have been advised that the mailbox, under the rules, is to be brown, white or black and must be changed. Must I comply? Once again, there must be accommodation for the tenant’s disability. If the mailbox was installed on the common elements, including exclusive-use common elements, the corporation should have been requested to carry out the installation pursuant to its obligation under the Human Rights Code. You were entitled to alter or add to the common elements only with the written approval of the corporation and the registration of an agreement between you and the corporation in accordance with section 98 of the Condominium Act. Even if the corporation could not refuse its approval, there would be legal and registration costs for the preparation and registration of the agreement. The agreement would be unnecessary if the mailbox were installed by the corporation. It makes no sense for the corporation to require you to remove the mailbox if the corporation can then be required to reinstall it.
Is it true that condominium documents cannot prevent the renting of a unit by the unit owner? Yes. A court in 1974 held that the right to sell or lease one’s property is “a fundamental incident of ownership” and cannot be prohibited even by a declaration provision. More recently, a court held that a rule requiring a unit lease to be for a term not less than six months was valid. The court endorsed the purpose of the rule which was to prevent the leasing of units for short terms producing transient use similar to a hotel operation.
What is the proper procedure for removing the board of directors? We have signatures of owners of 50 per cent of the units, plus one.
A requisition for an owners’ meeting to remove directors requires signatures by owners of just 15 per cent of the units. The requisition must identify and provide a reason for removal of each director and must identify a director who was elected by owners of owner-occupied units. The requisition must be delivered to the condominium president or secretary or deposited at the address for service for the corporation. The removal of a director requires an affirmative vote of owners of more than 50 per cent of the units at the requisitioned meeting. There must be a separate vote for removal of each director named in the requisition. Lawyer Gerry Hyman is an expert in condominium law. Send questions to gerry@gerryhyman.com or fax to his attention at 416-925-8492. Letter volume prevents individual replies.