Anti-Social Behaviour, Expulsion from Condominium, and the Reconstruction of Ownership
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Statutory condominium regimes facilitate massive increases in the density of owners. The courts are responding to this spatial reorganization of ownership by reconstructing what it means to be the owner of an interest in land. This article analyzes the ten cases over eight years (from 2008 to 2015) in which Canadian courts grant eviction and sale orders against owners within condominium for anti-social behaviour. The expulsion orders are new. Until these cases, ownership within condominium in Canadian common law jurisdictions was thought to be as robust as ownership outside condominium such that owners could not be expelled from condominium for anti-social behaviour. In addition to describing a new development in Canadian property law, the analysis reveals that some form of mental disorder appears to be a contributing factor in the majority of the cases. The article then argues that eviction and sale orders are not only reconstructing ownership, but also redistributing property. This is because the orders, although diminishing the security of property for some, enhance ownership for a great many more by providing a remedy—the physical and legal expulsion of an owner for chronic anti-social behaviour—that is not available to those outside condominium. Finally, the article argues that the judicial willingness to reconstruct ownership is a function, at least in part, of the spatial reorganization of owners. What it means to be an owner of land emerged from a context where owners were dispersed over the surface of the earth. Under statutory condominium regimes, owners can now be stacked in a vertical column many stories high. The article concludes by asking whether the judicial reconstruction of ownership is an appropriate response to the spatial reorganization of owners and the resulting challenges posed by anti-social behaviour when the behaviour is frequently attributable, at least in part, to some form of mental disorder.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".