The Need to Redact Proxies

In the recent case of Sakala v YCC 344, an owner requested copies of unredacted proxy forms received by the condominium corporation in relation to the corporation’s recent AGM. In keeping with previous decisions, the CAT again confirmed that: 

“The proxy forms must be redacted for information which identifies specific units or owners of YCC 344.”

The purpose, of course, is to protect the voting privacy of the owners.

Because proxy forms are not “core records”, the CAT also confirmed that the condominium corporation was entitled to charge a reasonable amount to redact the proxies. In terms of the labour charge, the CAT said that:

“…two minutes per page was a reasonable estimate to be used for calculating the labour hours needed for redacting records.”

In this case, there were 441 pages of proxies (147 proxy forms at 3 pages per form). The condominium corporation estimated five hours of “redacting time”, which the CAT noted was less than 2 minutes per page, and therefore reasonable. The CAT went on to say as follows:

“I also find that $30 per hour is a reasonable hourly rate given the nature of the work required.”

The CAT also determined that the condominium corporation would be required to make one copy of the original proxy forms (so that those copies could then be redacted, and provided to the owner, while preserving the originals). Accordingly, the condominium corporation was also permitted to charge for 441 copies at $0.20 per page in accordance with Section 13.3(8).3 of Regulation 48/01.

The owner also asked to see a copy of the corporation’s “summary excel spreadsheet” used to record information from paper proxy forms. The CAT said that the owner would be entitled to see the spreadsheet, but would need to submit a further request for it, since the owner had only asked to see the proxies. The CAT said:

“I further find that the summary excel spreadsheet does not constitute an instrument appointing a proxy and that Ms. Sakala must make a separate request for this record to YCC 344.”

It seems to me that any information about specific units or owners and shown on the spreadsheet would similarly need to be redacted; but I suppose that would be something to consider if and when the request was received from the owner.

In summary, the Sakala case appears to me to be a very nice summary of the principles that apply when an owner makes a request, following a meeting, to see proxies.

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