Land Title Practice Manual

173 Other Court Remedies

In This Volume

173 (1) On application by the strata corporation, the Supreme Court may do one or more of the following:

  • (a) order an owner, tenant or other person to perform a duty the owner, tenant or other person is required to perform under this Act, the bylaws or the rules;
  • (b) order an owner, tenant or other person to stop contravening this Act, the regulations, the bylaws or the rules;
  • (c) make any other orders it considers necessary to give effect to an order under paragraph (a) or (b).
  • (2) If, under section 108(2)(a),
  • (a) a resolution is proposed to approve a special levy to raise money for the maintenance or repair of common property or common assets that is necessary to ensure safety or to prevent significant loss or damage, whether physical or otherwise, and
  • (b) the number of votes cast in favour of the resolution is more than 1/2 of the votes cast on the resolution but less than the 3/4 vote required under section 108(2)(a),
  • the strata corporation may apply to the Supreme Court, on such notice as the court may require, for an order under subsection (4) of this section.
  • (2.1) Section 171(2) does not apply to an application under subsection (2).
  • (3) An application under subsection (2) must be made within 90 days after the vote referred to in that subsection.
  • (4) On an application under subsection (2), the court may make an order approving the resolution and, in that event, the strata corporation may proceed as if the resolution had been passed under section 108(2)(a).

1998-43-173, effective July 1, 2000 (B.C. Reg. 43/2000); 2007-14-189, effective December 1, 2007 (B.C. Reg. 354/2007); 2009-17-25, effective December 12, 2013 (B.C. Reg. 263/2013); 2012-25-110, effective December 12, 2013 (B.C. Regs. 257/2013 and 262/2013); 2015-40-44; 2022-41-22.

CASE LAW

Expert Evidence on Special Levy for Building Envelope

In Re Strata Plan VR 2213, 2022 BCCA 257, the court below had dismissed the strata corporation’s petition seeking an order pursuant to s. 173(2) of the Strata Property Act that a special resolution calling for the imposition of a special levy be approved. The special levy, intended to raise funds to repair the building envelope, had been passed by a simple majority, which was less than the 3/4 vote required under s. 108(2)(a).

The appellant, Thurlow & Alberni Project Ltd. (“Thurlow”), submitted the judge had erred in addressing its defences by ordering it to pay its share of any special levy for any future repairs, despite dismissing the petition. The respondent strata corporation cross appealed, arguing that the judge had erred in applying the wrong test in interpreting s. 173(2) of the Act and misapprehending the evidence with respect to the necessity of the repairs.

Held: Appeal and cross appeal allowed. The order against the appellant had been made on the court’s own motion and without the benefit of argument from counsel. On the cross appeal, the judge had erred in requiring the risk to be imminent and requiring the repairs to be the minimum necessary to address the risk. The judge had also misapprehended the expert evidence, which showed the building envelope was obsolete and needed to be replaced.