In a recent decision from the British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT), the case of Shen v. Polo offers important insights for condominium residents, boards, and property managers about pet-related incidents in shared spaces. CTV News wrote an article about the decision which can be read here.
On Christmas Eve 2022, a resident, Ying Shen, was bitten by a dog named Juliet in the elevator lobby of her condominium building. The dog was under the care of Jeffrey Polo, the father of Juliet’s owner, who was out of the country at the time. Ms. Shen claimed damages of nearly $5,000 for medical costs, lost wages, and pain and suffering as a result of the incident.
Security footage confirmed that the dog lunged at Ms. Shen and made contact with her hand, resulting in a superficial wound.
The CRT found that while the bite did occur, the legal standards for liability were not met, and the claim was dismissed. The tribunal considered two main legal concepts:
- Scienter – This doctrine requires proof that the dog had a known tendency to bite. Since Juliet had no documented history of aggression and there was no evidence of prior incidents, this claim failed.
- Negligence – The tribunal found that Mr. Polo had taken reasonable steps to control the dog. He was holding Juliet on a short leash and attempted to keep her close. Although the bite occurred, the CRT ruled that his actions did not fall below the legal standard of care.
What This Means for Condominium Communities
This case highlights several key takeaways for condominium corporations and residents:
- Shared Spaces Mean Shared Responsibilities: Incidents in the common elements such as lobbies and elevators can quickly become legal matters. Condominium corporations should ensure that pet policies and rules are clearly communicated and enforced.
- Reasonableness: The condo industry’s favourite word. Although this case was between the pet-owner and the victim, condo corporations are obligated to enforce their governing documents and ensure the safety of persons and property in the corporation. We often see similar incidents whereby corporations try to immediately take steps to have dog(s) removed. It is important to take escalating enforcement steps rather than act in haste – especially if the matter then proceeds to the Condominium Authority Tribunal or the Superior Court.
- Owners Are Accountable for Caretakers: Even though the dog’s owner was abroad, the tribunal held that the person in control of the dog at the time was responsible for its behavior. Condo residents should be cautious when entrusting the care of their pets to others in shared environments.
The CRT’s decision reinforces the importance of proactive risk management in condo settings. Clear rules and responsible pet ownership can help prevent similar disputes and protect both residents and condo corporations from costly legal battles.
