Who Benefits: Allocating Common Property Expenses that “Solely Relate to” a Section of a Strata Corporation

The BC Strata Property Act, SBC 1998, c 43 (the “Act”) permits strata corporations to create “sections” to represent the different interests of different types of strata lots (i.e., residential vs. non-residential, tower vs. townhouse, etc.). Under s. 195 of the Act, expenses for common property that “relate solely to” the strata lots in a section are to be shared by the owners of those lots only, calculated pro rata based on unit entitlement.

Naturally, s. 195 has generated debate about what exactly “relate solely to” means. A recent decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court, Section 2 of the Owners, Strata Plan LMS 257 v. The Owners, Strata Plan LMS 257, 2025 BCSC 1985 (“LMS 257”), provides clarity. In LMS 257, the court found the owners of strata lots in a commercial section were not required to pay to repair an interior courtyard catwalk used solely by owners in the residential section. It affirmed guidance from the BC Court of Appeal in Thurlow & Alberni Project Inc. v. The Owners, Strata Plan VR 2213, 2022 BCCA 257 (“Thurlow”), concluding that expenses “relate solely” to a section where the expenses “solely benefit” that section.  

Background

LMS 257 concerned a mixed-use building in Mission, B.C., with each distinct use (commercial and residential) represented by a section. Most residential owners access their units using catwalks located in an interior courtyard. No commercial owners or tenants used the catwalks. Over the years, the catwalks had fallen into disrepair. In December 2024, the strata corporation passed resolutions approving special levies totalling $1.7 million to pay to repair the catwalks, with about $140,000 allocated to the commercial section.

The commercial section sued the strata to overturn the levies. The commercial owners argued that the catwalks, though common property, “relate solely to” the residential owners and, therefore, the commercial owners should not be required to pay any share of repair expenses.

BCSC Decision

The court addressed two issues: (i) does the Act permit common property expenses that relate solely to one section to be allocated to that section absent an express bylaw? And (ii) if so, do the catwalks “relate solely to” the residential section?

On the first issue, the commercial section argued that the levies must be allocated in accordance with s.195. The strata corporation disagreed. It argued that the repair expenses for common property could be allocated by section only if bylaws permitted this allocation, relying on Yang v. The Owners, Strata Plan LMS 4084, 2010 BCSC 453 (“Yang”). In Yang, the court held that the strata corporation is responsible for the expenses to maintain common property of the strata corporation because the Act does not refer to “common property of a section” or to “the obligation of a section to repair and maintain common property”.

The court considered how Yang fit with subsequent jurisprudence, including Thurlow and Norenger Development (Canada) Inc. v. Strata Plan NW 3271, 2018 BCSC 1690 (“Norenger”). In Norenger, the court held that s. 195 creates a default rule for expense allocation between sections. Similarly, in Thurlow, the BC Court of Appeal held that if an expense is shown to relate only to the strata lots in one section, then s.195 will apply.

The court adopted the interpretation set out in Thurlow and Norenger, which ran counter to that in Yang (which was also distinguishable on its facts). It found the catwalks “solely benefit and thus solely relate” to lots in the residential section because their only use was to permit residential owners to access their units. The commercial owners had no reason to use the catwalks, and did not even have fob access to the courtyards where the catwalks are located. Accordingly, the court held that the expenses for repairing the catwalks should be borne entirely by the residential section.

Takeaways

LMS 257 is the first case to apply Thurlow to s.195. As decided in Thurlow, s.195 of the Act creates a default rule governing the allocation of common property expenses that relate solely to the strata lots in one section. “Solely” means to the exclusion of all else.

Whether common property expenses “relate solely” to a section turns on whether the expenses “solely benefits” the section. Relevant indicia include who uses the common property and who can access it.

We Can Help

McCarthy Tétrault’s BC Real Estate Litigation Group comprises a team of industry-leading BC lawyers with deep experience navigating complex BC real estate disputes, including strata property disputes. McCarthy Tétrault represented the successful appellants in the leading Court of Appeal case of Thurlow.

Our lawyers provide a full suite of litigation services across a broad range of disputes, including construction, development, environmental, purchase and sale, tenancy and leasing, land use and bylaw, bankruptcy and insolvency, tax and assessment, and other disputes. Whether you’re a developer, an investor, or a real estate professional, trust McCarthy Tétrault to protect your interests and help you achieve your objectives in the BC real estate market.

If you have any questions about real estate disputes, please contact the authors or the other lawyers in our litigation group.

Case Information

Section 2 of the Owners, Strata Plan LMS 257 v. The Owners, Strata Plan LMS 257, 2025 BCSC 1985

Docket: S256821

Date of Decision: October 9, 2025