🧠The Truth
That’s completely false – and legally indefensible.
Condominiums in Ontario are self-governing communities. The Condominium Act, 1998 gives owners the right to participate, communicate, and organize around matters that affect their homes and investments. When boards or property managers try to suppress owner communication – by tearing down flyers, banning newsletters, or silencing critics – they cross into oppression and bad-faith governance.
Below are the exact legal provisions that protect your right to share materials of community interest.
⚖️ 1. Section 135 – Oppression Remedy
s. 135(1): An owner, corporation, or other interested party may apply to the court for an order where the conduct of the corporation, the board, or an owner is oppressive or unfairly prejudicial or unfairly disregards the interests of the applicant.
đź“Ś Meaning:
If a board suppresses communication – for example, by
- Removing only critical or dissenting flyers,
- Refusing owners’ ability to communicate about community issues while distributing their own propaganda, or
- Using management to silence owners
that conduct is oppressive and unfairly prejudicial. Courts can (and do) order boards to stop such behaviour.
This is the main legal weapon against censorship or retaliation.
🧾 2. Section 37 – Standard of Care of Directors
s. 37(1): Every director and officer of a corporation shall exercise the powers and discharge the duties of his or her office honestly and in good faith; and exercise the care, diligence and skill that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances.
đź“Ś Meaning:
When directors use their authority to silence dissent or restrict owner communication, they breach this duty.
A competent, good-faith director knows that informed owners are essential in a self-governing corporation.
Silencing owners ≠acting in good faith.
🧩 3. Section 58 – Rules Must Be Reasonable
s. 58(1): The board may make, amend or repeal rules to promote the safety, security, or welfare of the owners and property or to prevent unreasonable interference, provided that the rules are reasonable and consistent with the Act, declaration and by-laws.
đź“Ś Meaning:
If management enforces a “no-posting” or “no-flyers” rule, it must:
- Serve a legitimate purpose (e.g., fire safety or cleanliness), and
- Be reasonable and applied equally to everyone.
A rule that bans only certain viewpoints – like criticism of the board – is invalid under s. 58 and legally challengeable.
🗳️ 4. Sections 46 & 47 – Requisition Rights
Owners holding at least 15 % of the votes may requisition a meeting (s. 46).
The board must give notice to all owners (s. 47).
đź“Ś Why It Matters:
To exercise these rights, owners must be able to communicate freely – to share information, organize signatures, and distribute notices.
Any attempt to block that communication interferes with statutory rights and can be treated as oppression under s. 135.
🧩 Bottom Line
Claiming that “owners can’t post or distribute materials” is Lie No. 8.
It’s an excuse used by boards that fear transparency.
The Condominium Act protects owners’ right to communicate and any board that tries to silence that right is acting in bad faith, unreasonably, and potentially unlawfully.
đź“° For more resources, rulings, and real examples, visit CondoTribune.com.
đź“Ł Because knowing your rights is the first step to enforcing them.
👉 If you believe your rights have been violated, contact us confidentially through the Condo Leak Tipline at www.CondoTribune.com/tipline – your story matters, and you’re not alone.
👉 If you believe your rights have been violated, contact us confidentially through the Condo Leak Tipline at www.CondoTribune.com/tipline – your story matters, and you’re not alone.
Disclaimer: This post is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For legal guidance specific to your situation, please consult a qualified lawyer.
