View cases - Stewart McKelvey

- 63 -109 The declaration of co-ownership also charges the members of the Syndicat’sboard of directors with preserving the immovable, maintaining and managing thecommon portions and ensuring that the co-owners of the private portions comply withthe declaration of co-ownership (ss. 12.2 and 12.2.8).110 The immovables making up Place Northcrest, which the respondentdescribed as [TRANSLATION] “very luxurious”, are upscale buildings whose co-owners2004 SCC 47 (CanLII)have a marked interest in maintaining their harmony and aesthetic value. Thedeclaration of co-ownership in fact provides that no co-owner may, directly or indirectly,change the destination of the immovable or alienate common portions the retention ofwhich is necessary to the destination of the immovable without obtaining the unanimousconsent of the other co-owners (s. 13.5.4).111 Despite the appellants’ allegations that the Syndicat had applied thedeclaration of co-ownership inconsistently, the trial judge found that, on a preponderanceof evidence, it had [TRANSLATION] “applied the restrictions in the declaration ofco-ownership in a consistent manner” ([1998] R.J.Q. 1892, at p. 1901). Thus, since1993, the Syndicat had asked co-owners to remove, in particular, fencing (woodentrellises) that had been installed on balconies and, in 1997, a satellite dish.B. Events Leading to the Legal Proceedings112 The appellants, as practising Orthodox Jews, celebrate Succot, a holiday thatbegins four days after “Yom Kippur”, that is, on the 15th day of the month of “Tishrei”in the Jewish calendar. The trial judge gave the following description of the holiday (atp. 1897):