Maintenance Matters: Key Lessons from Musa v. CCC 255 on Condo Corporations’ Responsibilities

The Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in Musa v. Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 255 provides important insights into the legal responsibilities of condominium corporations when it comes to maintenance and repair of the common elements.

The case arose when Mr. Musa, a unit owner at Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 255, experienced a fall on a walkway that had not been adequately cleared of ice. CCC 255 had contracted out its snow removal duties to a company called Exact Post.  On the day of the fall, it was noted that Exact Post had not applied salt to the roadway prior to the fall. Exact post did attend on site to apply salt about 90 minutes after the respondent’s fall. Mr. Musa contended that the condominium corporation failed to maintain the common elements of the property in a safe condition, as required by the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1990 (OLA). His claim centered on the corporation’s alleged negligence in managing snow removal and applying salt to the driveway to avoid slippage, which he argued contributed to the hazardous condition that led to his injury.  

Court’s Analysis

The court’s determination focused on whether the corporation met its duty to ensure the premises were reasonably safe for occupants. The Court of Appeal considered the corporation’s obligations under the OLA and found that CCC 255 had a duty to address hazardous conditions, such as snow and ice, on the common areas of the property.

Furthermore, the court held that CCC 255 had a statutory as well as a common law duty to take reasonable steps to address hazardous conditions and found that the corporation’s failure to manage these conditions appropriately constituted a breach of its duty of care.

The snow removal contractor, Exact Post, was found to be jointly liable.

We note that the Court’s decision does not address the possibility that the condominium corporation may have met its obligations by hiring an independent contractor (to attend to snow removal). In our view, someone who hires a reputable independent contractor is not necessarily liable for mistakes made by the contractor (in this case, mistakes made by Exact Post). But again, the Court apparently did not feel that this principle could “let the condominium corporation off the hook” in this case.

Implications

This decision emphasizes the importance for condominium corporations to uphold high standards of safety and maintenance, particularly in managing common areas (so as to prevent hazards). Failure to meet the standards of proper maintenance and repair can result in liability to the Corporation where injury or damage occurs as a result of the condition of the common elements.

Time and again we have seen that the courts will assess a condominium’s duty of care by looking at the prudent steps that could have, or should have, been taken to avoid an accident. Generally speaking, the Courts have confirmed that condominium corporation need to anticipate the risk associated with hazardous weather conditions, and address such risks in a proactive manner. As part of this obligation, many condominiums will enter into contracts for snow removal and winter maintenance – but condominiums must nonetheless take reasonable steps to ensure that their contractors are, in turn, properly addressing hazardous conditions on the common elements in a proactive, and timely manner.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the decision in CCC255 reinforces the obligations of condominium corporations under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1990 to maintain safe premises. It highlights the necessity of timely removal of snow and of taking reasonable, proactive measures to avoid injuries/ accidents.

Stay tuned to Condo Law News to keep up to date on the latest developments on condominium law!