Anonymous

Difference between revisions of "Strata Dispute Resolution (22:XV)"

From Clicklaw Wikibooks
no edit summary
Line 36: Line 36:
!Significantly Unfair?
!Significantly Unfair?
|-
|-
|Reid v Strata Plan LMS 2503, 2001 BCSC 1578
|[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2001/2001bcsc1578/2001bcsc1578.html ''Reid v Strata Plan LMS 2503 (Owners)'', 2001 BCSC 1578]
|Strata council resolution giving the owners permission to place planters, etc. on common property patio not significantly unfair to owner whose windows looked over area
|Strata council resolution giving the owners permission to place planters, etc. on common property patio not significantly unfair to owner whose windows looked over area
|No
|No
|-
|-
|Als v Strata Corp. NW 1067, 2002 BCSC 134
|[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2002/2002bcsc134/2002bcsc134.html ''Als v Strata Corporation NW 1067'', 2002 BCSC 134]
|Strata council refused permission to rent strata lot; not significantly unfair
|Strata council refused permission to rent strata lot; not significantly unfair
|No
|No
|-
|-
|Strata Plan VR 1767 v Steven Estate Ltd, 2002 BCSC 381
|[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2002/2002bcsc381/2002bcsc381.html ''Strata Plan VR1767 (Owners) v Steven Estate Ltd'', 2002 BCSC 381]
|Assessment of contribution to costs of building envelope repair based on erroneous unit entitlement registered at the land titles office in the strata plan is significantly unfair
|Assessment of contribution to costs of building envelope repair based on erroneous unit entitlement registered at the land titles office in the strata plan is significantly unfair
|Yes
|Yes
|-
|-
|McGowan v Strata Plan NW 1018, 2002 BCSC 936
|[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2002/2002bcsc673/2002bcsc673.html ''McGowan v Strata Plan NW1018 (Owners)'', 2002 BCSC 673]
|Bylaw allowing balcony enclosure; different treatment of some owners justified by safety issues
|Bylaw allowing balcony enclosure; different treatment of some owners justified by safety issues
|No
|No
5,109

edits