COURT INTERVENTION INTO REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE

"Telling someone they’re wrong is not the same as leading or inspiring them to do what’s right.”— Andy Stanley

HOW CAN THE COURTS INTERVENE IN STRATA REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE DECISIONS?

Although courts usually defer to strata decisions on repair and maintenance, they also have the power to intervene in limited circumstances.  Courts can intervene in a strata corporation’s repair and maintenance decisions in two main ways:

·       First, under section 173(2) of the Strata Property Act, the BC Supreme Court may authorize a special levy for repairs where the levy received more than majority support but failed to obtain the required 3/4 vote, with the court generally deferring to the strata corporation’s chosen repair scope and recognizing that the work need not be immediately necessary or limited to the minimum possible repair.

·       Second, through a Tadeson Order under section 165, the court may compel a strata corporation to carry out necessary repairs where the strata is unwilling or unable to meet its statutory repair obligations, often because of owner deadlock, repeated voting failures, or refusal to fund the work. In short, courts usually defer to strata repair decisions, but they will intervene either to help a strata corporation implement approved-but-underfunded repairs, or to force necessary repairs where strata governance has broken down.

What is an application made under section 173(2) of the Strata Property Act?

Section 173(2) of the Strata Property Act, empowers the BC Supreme Court to authorize a special levy to fund repairs where the resolution received more than a majority vote, but failed to achieve the ¾ vote required by section 108 of the Strata Property Act. 

When using section 173(2) to authorize a special levy, the courts have recognized that the purpose of the provision is to break deadlocks among owners, and have repeatedly shown a deference to the Council’s decisions on the scope of the repair and maintenance to be carried out, such that:

• Repairs do not need to be immediately necessary.

• The Repairs do not need to be the minimum scope of work necessary to solve an issue.

  
  

Recent appellate decisions confirm that courts will support strata corporations in fulfilling their repair obligations, even where the chosen work is not immediately required and the scope exceeds the minimum necessary work.

What is an application for a Tadeson Order under section 165 of the Strata Property Act?

A Tadeson Order is a form of relief granted by the Supreme Court of British Columbia that compels a strata corporation to fulfill its statutory duty to repair and maintain common property, and which orders a special levy to pay for the repairs.

Tadeson Orders are sought by individual owners or groups of owners, in situations where a strata corporation is unable or unwilling to proceed with necessary repairs, often due to internal deadlock, persistent voting failures, or reluctance by owners to approve the required funding. In these circumstances, the Court may step in to direct that repairs be undertaken and may also grant ancillary relief necessary to make the order effective. This can include authorizing the strata to proceed with a specific scope of work, requiring the approval or imposition of a special levy, or otherwise facilitating the implementation of the repairs.

Tadeson Orders are different from section 173(2) orders in that:

• ·       they are made to have the Court order repairs to be carried out.

• ·       they are sought by owners, and not the strata council. 

Since the introduction of section 173(2), applications for Tadeson Orders are usually only made where a strata corporation is refusing to carry out necessary repairs, or the resolutions to approve a levy to carry out repairs does not obtain majority support.

When faced with an application for a Tadeson Order, the Courts will generally rely on the evidence presented—often including engineering reports, depreciation reports, and council decisions—to determine whether the strata has failed to meet the standard of reasonableness required under section 72 of the Strata Property Act. Where that failure is established, the Court’s role is to ensure the strata corporation’s compliance with the statutory duty.

Unlike with a section 173(2) order, when issuing a Tadeson Order, the Courts will substitute their judgement for what repairs are necessary over that of the strata corporation.  What this means, is that Tadeson Orders may often result in a larger scope of work being carried out than what the Strata Corporation planned for.

In effect, a Tadeson Order operates as a backstop to strata governance. While the Strata Property Act is built on democratic decision-making and owner control, those principles cannot be used to avoid mandatory repair obligations. Where the strata’s processes break down or result in inaction, a Tadeson Order ensures that necessary repairs proceed, protecting both the integrity of the building and the interests of all owners.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS FOR OWNERS

For owners, this legal framework has several important consequences:

• Disagreement with a repair decision does not make it unreasonable.

• The strata is not required to adopt the cheapest or most extensive solution.

• Majority-approved decisions are difficult to challenge.

• Delays or prioritization of repairs may be reasonable depending on circumstances.

  
  

Owners must therefore assess strata decisions through the lens of reasonableness, not personal preference.

CONCLUSION ON COURT INTERVENTION WITH STRATA’S REPAIR DECISIONS

Deference to a Strata Corporation’s  has clear limits. Where a strata corporation fails to meet its statutory obligations—whether through inaction, deadlock, or unreasonable decision-making—the courts retain the authority to intervene through mechanisms such as section 173(2) orders and Tadeson Orders. These tools ensure that necessary repairs are not indefinitely delayed and that the integrity of the building is preserved. Ultimately, the law strikes a careful balance: it protects the autonomy of strata governance while ensuring that mandatory repair obligations are fulfilled when that governance breaks down.