CAT Confirms Smoke and Odour as a Nuisance
Complaints relating to smoke and odour migration continue to be a significant and recurring source of dispute in condominium communities. In Leeds Condominium Corporation No. 14 v. Favron, 2025 ONCAT 185, the Condominium Authority Tribunal (“CAT”) considered whether a unit owner’s smoking activity constituted a nuisance under section 117(2)(b) of the Condominium Act, 1998 (the “Act”) and whether it also breached the corporation’s governing documents.
The condominium corporation commenced a compliance application with the CAT after it received multiple complaints from residents regarding smoke and odour migrating from the respondent’s unit into the common elements and neighboring units. The evidence before the Tribunal established that, over a period of several months, multiple residents reported concerns about smoke infiltration. In response, the corporation took a progressive enforcement approach, issuing notices of violation, corresponding with the respondent on several occasions, and ultimately engaging legal counsel to send a formal compliance letter outlining the relevant provisions of the Act and the corporation’s no-smoking rule. However, despite these efforts, the complaints persisted, and the respondent failed to take steps to remedy the issue. Notably, the respondent also did not participate in the CAT proceeding.
The CAT found that the respondent had engaged in conduct that breached both the corporation’s no-smoking rule and section 117(2)(b) of the Act. In particular, the Tribunal confirmed that smoke and odour fall within the scope of prescribed nuisances under Ontario Regulation 48/01, and that activities resulting in the migration of smoke or odour between units may constitute an unreasonable nuisance where they interfere with other residents.
Accordingly, the CAT ordered that the respondent immediately cease smoking within the unit and on the common elements and comply with both the corporation’s governing documents and the Act. The CAT also ordered the respondent to pay compensation (pre-CAT legal costs incurred by the corporation) and also a significant portion of the corporation’s in-CAT legal costs and disbursements, finding that such costs were in large part reasonably incurred as a result of the respondent’s non-compliance and the corporation’s statutory obligation to enforce the Act.
From a practical perspective, this decision confirms that smoke and odour complaints, when supported by consistent and credible evidence, will be treated as a nuisance under the Act. Condominium corporations should ensure that complaints are properly documented and that a progressive enforcement approach is followed, including written warnings and clear communication of the governing documents. From an owner’s perspective, this decision reinforces that compliance with the governing documents is mandatory, and not optional.
Stay tuned to Condo Law News to keep up to date on the latest developments on condominium law!
