Definition : Damage

The juridical personality of the syndicate is distinct from the one of the co-owners and directors. His acts are binding only on himself, besides for the exceptions provided by law. The faults committed by the syndicate have consequences only on its own civil liability and not on the directors. Under these conditions, they are held harmless by the syndicate and assume no responsibility for any costs, expenses, charges or losses they have incurred for the administration of the building and the syndicate. This is the basic principle, but it is important to bring several nuances to it. Indeed, a director must never lose sight of the interest of the community of co-owners.

A bathtub or a washing machine that overflows into the apartment below, a hot water tank that conks out and spills down six floors: losses involving the civil liability of a co-owner are many co-ownerships. And they are expensive! This is why the amount of insurance premiums and deductibles have increased significantly in recent years. Worse still, some insurers no longer want to insure co-ownerships, because of a loss ratio that has become out of control. This situation is directly related to the insurer of the syndicate, which is almost always called upon to cover a loss, when damage has been caused to the common and private portions. Thus the question of who is responsible arises. It is also necessary to know the applicable law to the owner at fault. Other considerations affect both the insurer of the syndicate and those of the co-owners concerned, to determine who will pay what?  

In principle, co-owners have the right to enjoy their private portion as he sees fit. In addition, the law provides for a duty of tolerance on the part of neighbours, i.e. to accept the normal inconveniences that may result from the exercise of the right of ownership by the other. However, there are limitations to this use. In the event that the nuisance caused by an occupant of the building becomes excessive, it constitutes an abnormal neighborhood disturbance. It is common for such a case to constitute a breach of clauses relating to the peaceful enjoyment of the private portions, which are provided for in the by-laws of the immovable. That said, an abnormal neighbourhood disturbance does not systematically constitute a violation of the declaration of co-ownership. It should be noted that in certain circumstances, this type of inconvenience may be punished, even if the perpetrator has not committed any fault.

A co-owner may be liable to the syndicate, the other co-owners and the occupants of the immovable. As stated in Article 1457 of the Civil Code of Québec, every person has a duty not to harm others. As a co-owner, you must be careful and abide to the appropriate rules of conduct in accordance with the context and circumstances. Otherwise, you engage your civil liability and are required to remedy (financially third parties for moral or property damage and  personal injury.Therefore, co-owners must take out civil liability insurance covering in particular claims arising from their private portion.