The Simple Investor: an administrator for 24 condominiums with no boards

On or about September 17, 2026, the board members of the condominium corporations for each of the 43 buildings that SIREG Management Inc. had managed resigned en masse. The unit holders Timothy Duggan represents, over 700 of them by the endorsement's account, sought an administrator "to bridge the period until a new condo board can be established at their respective condominium." Their counsel told Justice Jana Steele on October 15 that the Condominium Act requires at least 15 days' notice of a meeting, and that no provision in the statute speaks to abridging notice periods for meetings. "Accordingly," the judge wrote, "at an absolute minimum, these condominium corporations would be rudderless until early to mid-November," per the Endorsement of Justice Steele, Oct. 15, 2026, paras. 11, 15 and n. 1.

The endorsement ends: "Order to go in the form signed by me today, with immediate effect" (para. 18). The signed order appoints Brian Antman administrator under s. 131 of the Condominium Act, 1998 over each of the condominium corporations in its Appendix 1, which lists 24; it vests in him all the powers, objects and duties of their boards, and disbands those boards "until further order," per the Order (Administrator), Oct. 15, 2026, paras. 2–3, 5 and App. "1". The owners' motion, and the objections that narrowed it, were reported here on October 15. Two days before the appointment, on October 13, the court had signed two orders on the mortgagees' motions: one consolidating 13 of the proposal proceedings for administrative purposes and lifting the stay for Firm Capital Mortgage Fund Inc. and 1000018790 Ontario Ltd., the other lifting it for Monarch Realty Fund LLC, each lift on the consent of the companies and the proposal trustee (Order (Administrative Consolidation and Lifting Stay of Proceedings), Oct. 13, 2026, paras. 2, 7; Order (Lifting Stay of Proceedings) re Monarch, Oct. 13, 2026, para. 2).

"Because there are no boards"

Section 131(1), as both endorsements quote it, allows the court to appoint an administrator "if at least 120 days have passed since a turn-over meeting has been held under section 43" (Endorsement of Justice Steele, Oct. 15, 2026, para. 8). Adjourning the motion for the unopposed corporations to the next morning, the October 14 endorsement says: "Among other things, the court requires evidence" that the condition has been met (Endorsement of Justice Steele, Oct. 14, 2026, paras. 6–8). On October 15 Mr. Duggan said it had been met for all but one of the listed corporations, Leeds Standard Condominium Corporation No. 48, which was removed from the list. The endorsement adds that two corporations that had opposed the appointment, Lambton Condominium Corporation No. 11 and Essex Standard Condominium Corporation No. 168, no longer did, and were added. The proposal trustee, AlixPartners Restructuring, Inc., supported the appointment, and Firm Capital supported it "in respect of the properties over which it is the mortgagee," per the Endorsement of Justice Steele, Oct. 15, 2026, paras. 2–3.

For the test, the endorsement sets out paragraphs 14 to 17 of Laxmi Real Estates Inc. v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2470, 2025 ONSC 3417, in which Papageorgiou J. set out the law on appointing an administrator under s. 131. "Self-governance is the norm," the passage says. The case law it summarizes establishes six factors, among them "a demonstrated inability of the board to manage the corporation," "the existence of substantial misconduct or mismanagement or both" and "whether only the appointment of an administrator has any reasonable prospect of bringing order to the affairs of the corporation." Those factors are balanced against the cost of an appointment, and the power "should only be invoked as a last resort"; there "must be a good reason for why the unit owners should not manage their corporation's affairs through an elected board," per the Endorsement of Justice Steele, Oct. 15, 2026, para. 9.

"In the instant case we have an unusual fast-moving situation," the judge wrote. The endorsement sets out the September 17 resignations and the evidence of Forrest Todd, Firm Capital's vice-president of mortgage banking, that "On September 29, 2026, the Registrar of the CMRAO ordered the immediate suspension of SIREG Management's license, citing, among other things, concerns regarding the misappropriation of client funds and SIREG Management's failure to meet its obligations." Those are the registrar's stated concerns, as Forrest Todd's evidence reports them. The court's own account of the position follows: "The situation is urgent and needs to be addressed. There are no condominium boards for the 43 condos, and the prior condominium management company (SIREG Management) has had its license suspended." It then quotes the trustee's list of urgent near-term issues, among them expired or expiring insurance policies and threatened disconnection of utilities, and cites B.K. v. York Region Standard Condominium Corp. No. 1253, 2019 ONSC 4552, as recognizing the absence of a quorum of directors in office, and an associated absence of effective governance, as a ground for appointing an administrator (Endorsement of Justice Steele, Oct. 15, 2026, paras. 10–14, 16).

There is "unquestionably," the judge found, a "demonstrated inability of the board[s] to manage the corporation[s]" because there are no boards. Given the pressing issues the trustee had identified, there is "the necessity of bringing order to the affairs of the corporation[s]," and given the notice requirements, "only the appointment of an administrator has any reasonable prospect of bringing order to the affairs of the corporation[s]." On cost, the endorsement says: "While there are costs associated with appointing an administrator, there are also significant potential costs with not having insurance or having utilities disconnected, among other things." The court was satisfied that the appointment was just or convenient, "having regard to the scheme and intent of the Condo Act and the best interests of the owners," per the Endorsement of Justice Steele, Oct. 15, 2026, para. 17. The findings track the first, third and sixth factors on the Laxmi list; the endorsement makes no finding on the other three, among them misconduct or mismanagement.

A comeback date fixed for October 22

Michael Ruhl, counsel for certain owners in the opposed condominiums (11 unit owners of Nipissing Standard Condominium Corporation No. 53, by the endorsement's list of participants), raised "various issues for the court's consideration." The endorsement records the first: that there may be unit holders in the unopposed condominiums who have not received notice and are unaware of the proceedings. "As noted by counsel for the Proposal Trustee, given the public nature of these NOI proceedings, I am satisfied that notice has been provided," the judge wrote. In any event, the judge added, the proposed order included a comeback clause, which is paragraph 19 of the signed order: anyone with standing under s. 131 to seek the appointment of an administrator "may bring a motion on notice for the advice or directions of the court, or to set aside all or part of this order appointing the Administrator" (Endorsement of Justice Steele, Oct. 15, 2026, paras. 4–5; Order (Administrator), Oct. 15, 2026, para. 19).