Is a Pet Restriction in a Condominium Complex Reasonable? Supreme Court of Canada’s Take on it

Is a restriction in a condominium complex’s rules which prohibits dogs or cats unreasonable? (Narhrstedt v. Lakeside Village Condominium Association)

No. California law provides that common interest development use restrictions are enforceable unless unreasonable.

In the case of Narhrstedt v. Lakeside Village Condominium Association, the Supreme Court of Canada held that a restriction in a condominium complex’s rules which prohibits dogs or cats is not necessarily unreasonable.

The reason for this is that the Condominium Corporation has the authority to enact by-laws that regulate the use and enjoyment of the common elements and individual units of the condominium complex. These by-laws are put in place to promote the safety, security, and quiet enjoyment of the owners and residents of the condominium.

The court noted that any by-law, including one that prohibits pets, must be reasonable in the sense that it must bear a rational and logical connection to the welfare of the condominium corporation and its residents as a whole. The court held that this includes the interests of both those who own pets and those who do not.

If a condominium corporation can demonstrate that the prohibition is necessary to ensure the health, safety, or welfare of the owners and residents of the condominium complex, then the restriction may be considered reasonable. On the other hand, if the restriction is arbitrary, unreasonable, or oppressive, it may be deemed unenforceable by the court.

Therefore, a restriction on pets in a condominium complex may be reasonable provided that it is necessary to ensure the overall safety, health, and welfare of the condominium corporation, and its residents. It is important to consult with legal counsel to ensure that these restrictions are reasonable and enforceable.

More Answers: