In a series of recent legal cases, condo boards, unit owners and property managers have been grappling not only with disputes but the complex nuances of communication. This extends to how residents and board members interact and what constitutes harassment or unacceptable conduct.

Three cases this year, one heard by the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) and two by the Superior Court of Justice, showcase the distinction between legitimate grievances and abusive behaviour.

As condo lawyer Sonja Hodis recently noted while discussing the cases during an event hosted by CCI Huronia, it’s not just the content of communication, but the tone and manner in which it’s delivered. “Be careful how you talk,” she said. “If you’re in a situation where things are heated and becoming personal, step back. Maybe have someone else do the communicating so they have that fresh, third perspective.”

In the most recent case, Peel Condominium Corporation No. 96 v. C.L., decided in June 2025, the Superior Court acknowledged that while a unit owner may have had a valid concern, conduct that is abusive, harassing, threatening or intimidating crosses the line. Over a 10-month period, the owner had sent more than 119 emails to the board, property manager and condo lawyer—most of them marked with hostility and personal attacks. As a result, the court granted a compliance order limiting the owner’s communication.

A CAT case from April 2025, TSCC 2510 versus Sharma, involved a board member accused of engaging in harassing conduct toward fellow board members, property management, and others. The corporation alleged Mr. Sharma was violating the governing documents and rules, such as the condo’s harassment rule. He was creating a toxic environment, and abusive in the way he communicated through disparaging and aggressive remarks made during meetings and visits to the management office, where he often refused to leave. This behaviour ultimately caused the manager to resign.

In the end, the tribunal found that his behaviour amounted to harassment, annoyance, and disruption. “They referenced his repeated emails, multiple complaints to the CMRAO, overtaking others at board meetings, and they upheld that he breached the rules,” said Hodis, noting the CAT was also cautious about granting a restriction sought by the corporation.

“Instead of having an order that says you shall cease all harassing, annoying or disturbing conduct—which is a very broad order—they suggested that the board consider options that might assist in self-governance,” she explained. These include appointing a single board member as liaison between the board and management outside of the meetings and establishing a code of board conduct, enshrined in a bylaw to hold members accountable.

“This case is interesting because the kind of communication style that Mr. Sharma obviously engaged in was harassing and an annoyance and a breach of the rules,” she added. “But in terms of the end result, even having an order that says you shall not do this, may not stop that behaviour.”

While the CAT awarded this corporation with $200, the Superior Court awarded a corporation in another similar case with full indemnity costs of more than $26,000. In TSCC 1644 v. Chinese Muslim Association of Canada and Zhu, May 2025, the condo corporation alleged a breach of section 117 of the Act. A unit-owning board director embarked on a “campaign of harassment”, targeting the board, management and security staff; however, video evidence played a pivotal role in this case.

“There is nothing that can beat evidence when you actually have something recorded,” noted Hodis. “I know there is a cost to having video surveillance in common areas, but it can definitely be very helpful in dealing with these types of situations. It takes out the he-said she-said nature and lets the decision maker see what is happening.”

In the end, the pattern of harassing, bullying and threatening behaviour cost the owner a lot of money. “[The Superior Court] acknowledged that while the unit owner may have had a legitimate complaint about the condo corporation it’s the manner in which he was communicating those complaints that got him in trouble.”

Thoughtful communication goes both ways. Hodis emphasized that boards and property managers must handle grievances against owners and tenants with care, even when the complaints have merit.

Navigating what can and cannot be said

Boards must also be mindful of how they communicate internally, specifically when determining what information can be shared without causing conflict or breaching confidentiality.

While the Condo Act requires that owners are kept informed in a timely and transparent manner, this often leads to frequent email exchanges among board members. This raises questions about what should be created as a record and what should be shared or not shared, said condo lawyer Patricia Elia. A derogatory comment about an owner, for example, has no place in an email thread and should remain private.

She also highlighted how property managers can summarize informal discussions and email a final resolution to board members, which can be addressed at the next meeting. This ensures confidentiality and preserves proper decision-making protocol at duly constituted board meetings.

“Boards cannot and should not share with unit owners information at their disposal,” Elia noted. “There is no obligation on a board to share emails that are sent between board members in relation to discussion about operational matters with unit owners.”

Delicate issues arise at AGMs. What to do?

The delicate balance of how to best communicate also plays out at the Annual General Meeting—an important platform, which can sometimes spur conflict if owners raise legal or personal issues.

Legal counsel can help navigate sensitive topics or defer them to a more appropriate time, Elia suggested. She advises board chairs to remind attendees that unit-specific concerns should be addressed privately through property management, keep AGM discussions general and avoid the trap of gossip or heated discussions.

“Take the high road; don’t do it. It’s in the minutes and it can cause further problems,” she said. “How you communicate and what you communicate at an AGM is very important.