Definition : Damage - Punitive damage

Under the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, adisabled co-owner is asking us to install four automatic door openers in the common portions, two of which have a remote-controlled joystick.  This co-owner told us that a significant portion of the installation costs would be covered by the Home Adaptation Program of the Société d'habitation du Québec (SHQ). However, when it was purchased, more than two years ago, this co-owner was already in a wheelchair.  He must have been aware that the building was not suitable for his condition. Knowing that the costs for the installation of these automatic door openers will far exceed the amounts allocated by the grant, not to mention the inspections and maintenance afterwards, we find that the financial impact for our co-ownership is excessive and unreasonable.  Question: Under the circumstances, are we required to accept his request, or can we refuse it?

Life in co-ownership is not always a long quiet river. It is like a micro-society where disputes are omnipresent. Many conflicts are neighborhood quarrels, which are usually settled with civility. However, it happens that some disputes are fueled by co-owners thirsty for justice who will want to assert their rights in court at all costs. This is why divided co-ownership is not immune to quarrelsome litigants who multiply legal recourses to redress real or fictitious damage. They usually represent themselves alone in court. They show stubbornness and narcissism by systematically trying to have indirectly what cannot be obtained directly.These righters seek to harm others by abusing their right to go to court.  

Je suis membre d’un syndicat de copropriétaires dans l’Outaouais comptant 80 copropriétaires dont 65% sont anglophones. Les rencontres de l’assemblée des copropriétaires et celles du conseil d’administration sont toujours en anglais. Lorsqu’une question est posée en français on y fait généralement abstraction et on la passe sous silence. Question : Au Québec les rencontres d’assemblée des copropriétaires ne doivent-elles pas être tenues en français en vertu de la Charte de la langue française? Quel est mon recours pour que les réunions soient tenues en français, à la limite bilingues?

Harassment in co-ownership can take many forms and develop in a wide variety of contexts. When occupants of a building with very different temperaments share a place to live, it happens that the spirits heat up to the point of making cohabitation impossible. A co-owner who infringes on his neighbor's privacy and interferes in his privacy can be particularly irritating and even embarrassing. If he comes to photograph him when he walks through the common portions, monitors all his comings and goings or installs a surveillance camera in the corridor pointing towards his front door, then there is an illegitimate invasion of his privacy. Such serious conduct can be considered psychological harassment, in that it seriously harms the person who is the victim.

Co-ownership is an environment conducive to conflict and acrimonious exchanges. Some people who are members of a community of co-owners are sometimes victims. This can happen at an annual meeting, when spirits are heating up and frustrations are at their peak. Latent conflicts between a co-owner and a director, deep disagreement about a resolution put to the vote, excesses following an unbearable tension are all examples that illustrate that in such situations, defamatory or insulting remarks can be expressed.   Co-ownership is not always a long quiet river Life in co-ownership is not always easy. Never mind, we must remain calm in all circumstances, in order to avoid unproductive slippages that could lead to the court. Whether expressed consciously or not, defamatory statements and their consequences vary according to various criteria. Legally speaking at least. It is better to avoid being prosecuted for this reason, because it would result in a toxic climate in the building, not to mention possible sequelae that would poison the lives of the people concerned.

15 septembre 2017 — Un couple de copropriétaires a réalisé que harceler des voisins peut coûter cher. Il a dû faire face à la justice, par le fait d’un autre couple qui l’a poursuivi pour harcèlement.

In the same way as any other natural or legal person, a syndicate of co-owners is likely to incur civil liability towards third parties, including co-owners. Responsibility is the counterpart of power: where authority is, there is responsibility. This responsibility can be translated into the financial contribution of the co-owners, since in the event of a judgment condemning the syndicate to pay a sum of money, this judgement will be enforceable against him and each of the persons who were co-owners at the time the cause of action arose, in proportion to the relative value of their fraction.Therefore the law obliges any syndicate of co-owners to take out insurance covering its civil liability towards third parties.