Definition : Personal information

We have a co-owner who has installed in his apartment a surveillance camera that can capture images of sidewalks located in common portions. This camera, located in his bedroom, can film passers-by through the window.  We have been informed that this co-owner plans to install more cameras to monitor the parking lot and surrounding areas this time. These are not cameras that board members have access to.  We have received questions and complaints about the legality of these cameras.  Question: Can you  tell us if this practice is legal in Quebec?

January 27, 2023 - The Mayor of Montréal, Valérie Plante, made a commitment on September 23, 2019, before the heads of state and government meeting in New York, to reduce the Montréal community's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 55% by 2030 compared to their 1990 level. To become carbon neutral by 2050, the City of Montréal adopted the By-law concerning greenhouse gas emission disclosures and ratings of large buildings (21-042).  The objective is to know the use of fossil fuels in buildings in order to reduce consumption. This regulation, which came into force on October 4, 2021, requires owners of large buildings to disclose the sources and amounts of energy their buildings use. By June 30 of each year, a declaration of such disclosure must be filed.

A co-owner made complaints against me to the syndicate of co-ownership. I asked for a list of complaints about me to find out exactly what I am accused of. I had a refusal as an answer. Question: How can I access this information? Which form do I need to fill out? Who do I contact if the syndicate does not cooperate?

La webradio du 16 novembre 2022 a traité d’un sujet fort complexe soit celui de la protection des renseignements personnels en copropriété divise. Cohabiter avec d’autres dans un immeuble en copropriété divise implique le droit au respect de la vie privée. Ce droit est garanti par l'article 3 du Code civil du Québec et la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne. Sa dimension informationnelle est juridiquement protégée par la Loi sur la protection des renseignements personnels dans le secteur privé (LPRPSP). Par suite de la sanction le 22 septembre 2022 du Projet de loi n° 64, de nouvelles règles d’utilisation et de diffusion des renseignements personnels assujettissent le monde de la copropriété. Les invités étaient l’avocat Me François Joli-Cœur associé du cabinet Borden Ladner Gervais, l'avocat émérite Me Yves Joli-Cœur du cabinet Therrien Couture Joli-Coeur, ainsi que madame Valéry Couture (gestionnaire de copropriété de Condo stratégis). Rappelons que Me François Joli-Cœur est une figure bien connue dans ce domaine, celui-ci axant sa pratique sur les questions de respect de la vie privée et de cybersécurité.

Cohabiting with others in a building in divided co-ownership implies the right to respect for the private life. This right is guaranteed by article 3 of the Civil Code of Québec and  the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. Its informational dimension is legally protected by  the Act respecting the protection of personal information in the private sector (PHIPA). With the assent  of Bill 64 on September 22, 2022, new rules for the use and dissemination of personal information have subject (and will subject) the world of co-ownership since September 22, 2022, while other rules will come into force in September 2023 and 2024.

Question: I want to sell my apartment. I am aware that I must provide a number of documents to the real estate broker who takes care of the sale, to the buyer in the making whose offer I will have accepted and to the  notary who is in charge of drafting the official documents of the sale. Specifically, whatare the documents to be communicated to the buyer of a co-ownership?

We are concerned about the comings and goings of strangers in our building. This concern is all the more justified by the fact that some of our co-owners rent without right, for short periods, to travelers (Airbnb-type rental). Question: Can the Board of Directors ask to see a tenant's identity card in order to certify that he is who he claims to be?

When our Board of directors communicates by email, with all the co-owners, this is done so that we do not see the email addresses of the co-owners. As a result, no one can see the response of others, so we cannot discuss the subject of communication. I find this quite contradictory, since according to our declaration of co-ownership we have to provide our contact information and our email address to the board of directors. In addition, it is indicated that the register contains the email address of all co-owners. The Board claims right to respect for the private life to justifie this approach to communication. Question: Am I entitled to require the Board of directors to provide me with the email address of the co-owners? 

The desire to preserve the safety of people and property can lead both syndicates and co-owners to consider installing surveillance cameras in the building. For many, when a co-ownership faces repeated acts of vandalism or burglary, video surveillance appears to be the only solution, especially since the decrease in the cost of installations and technical progress facilitate its access. However, the question of the legality of such facilities raises several debates in co-ownership. It should be noted that surveillance cameras are used in many buildings, although they do not please everyone, including the occupants of the building who claim the right to privacy. However, are surveillance cameras in a co-ownership legal? And if so, is there a procedure to follow?

The manager usually plays a key role in a co-ownership. Similarly to the board of directors, his duty is to preserve the immovable of which he is responsible. His appointment eases the director’s tasks, without the manager being substituted in their function. The board members will thus be better able to exercise their decision-making powers. That being said, managing a co-ownership is not always an easy task. It is in the best interest of directors to ensure that the manager assumes his mission with dignity, loyalty, diligence and honesty. To this end, the board of directors would be well advised to implement a code of conduct in which professional ethics are addressed, namely, without limitation, compliance with laws and regulations, transparency, confidentiality, conflicts of interest and, of course, discipline.

The board of directors occupies an important function in co-ownership governance. It holds meetings as often as the interest of the collectivity of co-owners require and addresses any matter that concerns the syndicate’s good management. These meetings are moderated by a president who ensures their efficient conduct. Directors can debate and reflect upon the orientations to give to their co-ownership. The more carefully and methodically the meetings are prepared, the more motivated and interested the members will be to participate thereto. Moreover, precise rules must be followed imperatively, otherwise the decisions taken could be invalidated.  

Decisions taken by directors must be recorded and recorded in the minutes. This document is essential for a co-ownership, because it ensures the written preservation of the deliberations of the board of directors, as well as that of  the result of each vote, so that any co-owner and director can refer to it over time. It also shows that the meeting of the board of directors was held properly. As such, it must be as detailed and clear as possible, without repeating everything that was said at the meeting. Personal assessments and quotations should not appear in the minutes of the Board of Directors. In view of its importance, this document must respect a certain formalism.  

27 mars 2012-  Tout syndicat de copropriété doit constituer et maintenir des registres, en plus d’en permettre la consultation par les copropriétaires. Or, cet accès aux registres ne s’effectue pas toujours de façon harmonieuse. D’une part, il y a des copropriétaires suspicieux qui multiplient les demandes de consultation des registres, croyant y trouver une preuve de malversation de la part des administrateurs. D’autre part, ce sont parfois les administrateurs qui agissent en roitelets et refusent l’accès aux registres à un copropriétaire. Où se trouve le juste milieu ?