Owners are entitled to records – not information or justifications behind decisions

Condo corporations take note—when it comes to records requests, the Tribunal has made it clear: you’re only expected to provide “records”, that actually exist, and not information or justifications.

Facts of the case

In De Francesco, a condo owner filed a fairly extensive records request.  The catalyst for this request was mostly related to work on the underground garage, which lead some owners to demands greater control and insight on the corporation’s governance and finances.

What records were requested

The owner requested five core records and ten non-core records.  The request was wide-ranging and included, amongst others, a request for:

• Records of advice and records of decision related to matters such as increases to condominium fees and expenditures.

• Any and all contracts for services/work as well as records of decisions on how contractors were invited to bid, how they were selected, the professional engineers used in the management of the work, the initial estimated value etc.

• Any and all records related to discussions between the property manager, the board and the contractor related to the garage membrane work.

• Any and all records related to the “borrowing” or use of the reserve fund including discussions between the board and any and all others on the subject and advice provided by the property manager.

• Any and all emails and other correspondence related to decisions on expenditures including awarding of contracts, agreement to pay for services etc. where those records were not part of minutes of board meetings.

The condo corporation responded by providing the records it had and was mandated to disclose, although some records were provide beyond the 30-day period and some in the various stages of the CAT proceeding.

Tribunal Decision

The CAT reviewed the evidence and found:

• All responsive records had been provided.
• The owner wasn’t entitled to anything further under the Act.
• Frustration with governance decisions doesn’t expand an owner’s legal rights to records.

The Tribunal acknowledged that, while some of the requests may have been broadly worded—perhaps out of frustration or a lack of clear information—that still did not entitle the owner to records that either do not exist or to explanations in place of documents. One of the clearest expressions of this reasoning came in the Tribunal’s words:

“The Applicant may wish for more information and may be frustrated by a perceived lack of rationale for certain decisions, but the ‘rationale’ requested is essentially a request for information, not a request for records.”

This line captures the core logic of the decision: the Act gives owners access to records—not to the thought process behind every board decision.  Specifically, for instance, while the Corporation has an obligation to maintain minutes detailed enough to provide insight or information for unit owners to be able to confirm that the corporation has met its duties and obligations:

… a corporation is not required to keep as records every document or other source of information to which the board might have referred in reaching a decision.

Why This Matters

This case is a reassuring reminder for condo boards: your obligation under section 55 of the Act is to disclose actual records, not to justify decisions or satisfy curiosity. A records request case is only about “records”.

The Tribunal showed a clear understanding of the balance between owners’ right to transparency and the board’s autonomy. It recognized that owners may feel left in the dark—but it didn’t allow that frustration to redefine the legal boundaries of disclosure.

Records request can raise issues that are far more complex than initially anticipated.  You are better off consulting with your favourite condo lawyer early on in the process.  This may allow corporation to resolve the issues (or many of them) before hand. It also greatly facilitate the process if the matter makes its way to Stage 3.