On February 17, 2025, an interesting court ruling provided significant guidance on how to proceed in the new insurance context. The CondoLegal.com website has detailed the lessons learned from this decision, which can be read in full here: Syndicat des copropriétaires du 1200 Ouest v. Sarhan (2025 QCCS 434).
One aspect that surprised many syndicates was that the syndicate was blamed for 50% of the claim’s costs because, in the Court’s opinion, it had not acted reasonably over an extended period.
Excerpt from the Judgment
[15] That said, the Court also finds that the Syndicate was at fault for failing to appropriately follow up and remind the Defendant to provide a copy of the keys and the damage and liability insurance policy. While this shortcoming does not excuse the Defendant from his obligations, the Court believes the Syndicate’s conduct — despite having retained a property management company specialized in condominium high-rise management — fell short of what would be expected from a reasonable syndicate in the same circumstances. By neglecting to perform proper follow-ups during the eleven years that the Defendant owned his unit, the Syndicate committed a fault. This fault contributed to the Incident, the resulting damages, and the payment of the deductible.
Does this mean that the syndicate must now chase after even the most reluctant co-owners to obtain copies of their private insurance policies and unit keys?
In our opinion, the syndicate has a duty to raise awareness and ensure that co-owners understand their obligations.
The notice of the annual general meeting (and its minutes), periodic memos, and the syndicate’s registry with automated reminders can all serve as effective means for raising such awareness.
That said, as in all condominiums, there will always be a few co-owners who resist compliance, regardless of the rule in question. So, what should be done in those cases?
Some syndicates will choose to remind co-owners of their obligations, emphasizing that, should an issue arise, they will be held liable for any additional consequences caused by their non-compliance.
Various forums available to the syndicate, such as the annual meeting (notice of meeting, discussion during the meeting, and minutes) as well as newsletters or memos sent to all co-owners, can be effective means of communication.
Moreover, certain software solutions, such as UpperBee, can be used to maintain such records (private unit keys, private insurance policies, private water heaters, etc.) and send periodic reminders when a co-owner fails to comply.
Many syndicates have a penalty clause allowing them to intervene in cases of non-compliance with the declaration of co-ownership, eventually leading to the imposition of fines.
This method provides a stronger reminder. However, when imposing fines, the question arises: how far should the syndicate go, given that unpaid fines could still be ignored by the violators?
To maintain credibility, the syndicate might then have to initiate a claim at Small Claims Court to recover outstanding amounts.
Ultimately, the syndicate could consult legal counsel to assess whether seeking an injunction to enforce compliance with the declaration of co-ownership would be appropriate.
In our view, that would be like “killing a fly with a bazooka,” but… we’ll leave it to the lawyers to determine whether it’s a viable option.
Declarations have long included clauses like the following:
6.3.1 Each Co-owner must obtain and maintain property insurance coverage against damage to any added value in their Private Portions, including Improvements made by or for them, and coverage against damage to personal property or effects located in their Private Portions.
Additionally, it is increasingly common to find obligations requiring the syndicate to maintain a register of individual insurance policies, as illustrated by the following:
11.1 The Syndicate’s Register must be maintained and kept under the supervision of the Board of Directors. In all cases, article 37 of the Civil Code of Québec must be respected:
“Any person who creates a file on another person must have a serious and legitimate interest to do so. They may only collect information relevant to the stated purpose of the file and may not disclose it to third parties or use it for purposes incompatible with the purpose of its creation without the consent of the individual concerned or authorization by law; nor may they otherwise infringe upon the individual’s privacy or reputation.”
11.2 The Register of the co-ownership and of the Syndicate must include, among other things:
…
11.2.12 The register of individual insurance policies obtained from Co-owners and its updates;
…
Maintaining this register is one of the most challenging administrative tasks because it involves all co-owners, each with different insurance renewal dates.
The administrative workload to keep this register exhaustive is colossal — and even after providing a copy of their policy, a co-owner could cancel it at any time without notice.
Thus, a syndicate can never be absolutely certain that all co-owners and tenants are insured at the time of a claim, no matter how much effort is put into updating the register.
In our opinion, the Board of Directors will eventually have to decide how much effort (and financial resources) it will dedicate — versus the risks to the syndicate — to ensuring that all co-owners fulfill their own insurance obligations.
Did you know that maintaining dryer ducts is one of the simplest… and most effective ways of preventing condominium fires?
Over time, lint accumulates in the ducts, reducing air circulation. The result: the dryer overheats, consumes more energy, operates less efficiently and becomes a real fire hazard.
The high-temperature thermal safety fuse remains continuously activated (on/off) and may subsequently fail. Not only does this increase the risk of fire, it also leads to higher operating cost.
Dryer fires are among the leading causes of preventable losses. In addition to the danger to people, a fire can cause major damage: triggering of the sprinkler system, damage to units, interruption of services…
In condominiums, where ducts are often long, partially concealed or not easily accessible, collective prevention becomes essential.
Dryer ducts should be serviced every 2 to 4 years, depending on usage and duct configuration (more often in high-volume buildings or with long ducts).
In general, dryer ducts are for private use, so maintenance is the responsibility of each co-owner. However, many syndicates choose to :
This approach ensures that preventive maintenance is carried out, limits the risk of fire for all concerned, and optimizes costs. It’s a very good investment, because the cost of such maintenance is minimal compared with the cost of repairing the building in the event of a fire triggering the sprinkler system.
What’s more, when the work is grouped together under the umbrella of the syndicate, the manager’s coordination fees (if applicable) and duct maintenance costs are no more expensive than having the maintenance company brought in individually by each owner.
Elise Beauchesne, CPA, Adm.A
Unique software
Save - time and money
Flexibility
Multidisciplinary team
Contact information
1751, rue Richardson
Bureau 6115, Montréal
(Québec) H3K 1G6
Download our
mobile app
