🏛️ FCM · Professional Responsibilities: CPA, Self-Regulation, Licensing and Brokerage Duties

1. When is a condominium corporation constituted under the Condominium Property Act?

1. When the condominium plan is registered in the land titles office.
2. When the developer calls the first general meeting of the owners.
3. When the first buyer of a unit takes possession of that unit.
4. When the interim board is replaced by an elected board of owners.

(CPA current as of May 14, 2026) Under section 25(1) of the Condominium Property Act, the corporation is constituted on registration of the condominium plan, and it consists of the unit owners. Possession by the first buyer, the first general meeting and the replacement of an interim board all happen later and do not create the corporation.

2. A condominium plan describes each unit by the floors, walls and ceilings of a building. How does the Condominium Property Act classify such a unit?

1. A unit of common property, because the walls are shared.
2. A bare land unit, because the plan sets the unit boundaries.
3. A unit in a building, as distinct from a bare land unit.
4. A unit held under a cooperative, because the building has one title.

(CPA current as of May 14, 2026) Section 1(1)(y) of the Condominium Property Act defines a unit in a building as a space described by reference to floors, walls and ceilings, while a bare land unit is land described by boundaries governed by survey monuments. Common property is the part of the parcel outside the units shown on the plan, and a cooperative is a different ownership structure in which the corporation holds title.

3. At a general meeting of a condominium corporation, a person demands a unit factor vote. How are the votes counted?

1. One vote for each owner, whatever number of units the owner holds.
2. By the dollar amount of contributions that each owner has paid.
3. By the unit factors of the unit or units that each owner holds.
4. By the number of owners present, with the chair breaking a tie.

(CPA current as of May 14, 2026) Under section 26(1)(b) of the Condominium Property Act, a unit factor vote is a vote on the basis of the unit factors for an owner's unit or units. One vote per owner is the owner vote, which section 26(1.4) says is nullified if the demand is made before its results are announced. Paid contributions and a chair's casting vote are not measures of voting power under section 26.

4. A condominium manager reads that the Real Estate Act itself is about to be changed. Which body has the power to amend the Act?

1. The RECA Board, by passing a bylaw at one of its own meetings.
2. The Legislative Assembly of Alberta, by passing an amending statute.
3. An Industry Council, by making a rule for the licensees of its industry.
4. RECA's registrar, by issuing a written direction to every licensee.

(REA current as of September 1, 2026) The Real Estate Act is a statute, so it can be amended only by the Legislative Assembly of Alberta passing an amending Act; the amendments noted under its sections, such as 2020 c10, are Statutes of Alberta. The RECA Board makes bylaws under section 11 of the Real Estate Act, and each Industry Council makes rules for licensees in its industry under section 12, subject to the Minister's written approval under section 12.1 where the regulations require it. Bylaws and rules operate under the Act and cannot change it, and the registrar has no power to amend legislation.

5. When does a proxy given by an owner expire under the Condominium Property Regulation?

1. At the end of the next annual general meeting, even if the proxy names a later date.
2. On the day the owners approve the corporation's next annual budget at a general meeting.
3. Twelve months after it is given, unless the owner revokes it before that date arrives.
4. On the earliest of its stated date, 6 months after it is given, or the giver ceasing to own.

(CPR current as of February 15, 2026) Section 31.4 of the Condominium Property Regulation says a proxy expires on the earliest of the expiry date set out on it, 6 months from the date it was given, and the date the giver ceases to be an owner or mortgagee of the unit. A 12-month life, expiry at the next annual general meeting and expiry on budget approval are not in the regulation.

6. An owner emails the manager a signed note saying that Dana Whitlock may vote for her at Saturday's meeting. The note gives the owner's name but no unit number and no date. How should the manager treat it?

1. As a valid proxy, because an electronic copy with a signature is a permitted format.
2. As invalid, since required elements are missing; tell the owner how to give a proper one.
3. As an invalid proxy, because proxies must be notarized hard copies and not emails.
4. As a valid proxy once Dana Whitlock confirms the arrangement by phone at the meeting.

(CPR current as of February 15, 2026) Section 31.3(1) of the Condominium Property Regulation makes a proxy invalid unless it has the owner's name and unit number, the name of the person receiving it, the date and the owner's signature. An electronic copy is allowed, but this note lacks two required elements, and a phone confirmation cannot supply them. Proxies need not be notarized or on paper.

7. Unit 14 is subject to a registered mortgage. At the annual general meeting, the mortgagee's representative demands to cast the unit's vote, but the mortgagee never gave the corporation written notice of its mortgage. Who may exercise the vote?

1. The owner, because the mortgagee's priority to vote depends on written notice first.
2. The mortgagee, because a registered mortgage gives it the first right to vote at meetings.
3. The board chair, until the mortgagee delivers its written notice after the meeting ends.
4. Neither of them, because the unit's vote is suspended until the notice has been given.

(CPA current as of May 14, 2026) Under section 26(2) of the Condominium Property Act, the first-priority mortgagee may vote ahead of the owner only if it has notified the corporation of the mortgage in writing and is present, and section 26(3) says that rule does not apply without written notice to the corporation's address for service. The owner therefore votes. The chair has no power to vote for the unit, and the vote is not suspended.

8. For the purposes of this question, a unit factor vote is demanded at a general meeting of Larkspur Condominium Corporation. Unit 12, with a unit factor of 640, is co-owned by Aiko (three-quarter interest) and Ben (one-quarter interest); Aiko attends and votes in favour, while Ben is absent and gave no proxy. The other owners voting in favour hold 2,150 unit factors in total, and no arrears or mortgagee issue affects any unit concerned. How many unit factors are counted in favour of the motion?

1. 2,310 unit factors
2. 2,630 unit factors
3. 2,470 unit factors
4. 2,790 unit factors

(CPA current as of May 14, 2026) Under section 26(1.3)(a) of the Condominium Property Act, in a unit factor vote each co-owner represents the portion of the unit's unit factors equal to the portion of the unit that co-owner owns, and under section 26(1.3)(b) an absent co-owner's unit factors are not counted unless that co-owner assigned the vote by proxy to a person attending. Aiko therefore carries 640 x 3/4 = 480 unit factors and Ben's 160 are not counted: 2,150 + 480 = 2,630. The figure 2,790 credits Aiko with all 640 unit factors, ignoring the absent co-owner rule; 2,470 splits the unit equally (320 each) instead of by ownership share; 2,310 gives Aiko only Ben's one-quarter share (160).

9. The board of Birchwood Condominium Corporation wants to change the bylaw that sets the number of board members and also to adopt a procedure for booking the loading dock. Which approach is correct?

1. A board resolution for both, because the board administers the corporation.
2. A special resolution of the owners for both, since rules also bind owners.
3. A special resolution for the bylaw change and a board resolution for the booking procedure.
4. An ordinary resolution for the bylaw change and a board resolution for the booking procedure.

(CPA current as of May 14, 2026) Section 32(3) of the Condominium Property Act allows a bylaw to be amended, repealed or replaced by a special resolution, while section 32.1(1) lets the board make a procedural rule by resolution, provided the rule is reasonable and consistent with the Act, the regulations and the bylaws. The board alone cannot change a bylaw, and an ordinary resolution is not enough for one. Rules do not need a vote of the owners.

10. A board adopts a rule, by resolution, that no unit may be used as a home-based design studio. The bylaws do not restrict home offices. A manager is asked whether the rule can be enforced. What is the correct position?

1. Yes, because a rule passed by board resolution binds owners once they are informed.
2. Yes, if two-thirds of the owners do not object in writing within 30 days of notice.
3. No, because rules cannot restrict unit uses and must be consistent with the bylaws.
4. No, because the Registrar must first approve any rule that affects the use of units.

(CPA current as of May 14, 2026) Section 32.1(3) of the Condominium Property Act says rules must not restrict the uses of units, and section 32.1(2) requires them to be consistent with the bylaws, which prevail over an inconsistent rule. Informing owners under section 32.1(4) does not cure that defect. The Act has no owner-objection mechanism or Registrar approval for rules.

11. A bylaw of Ridgeline Condominium Corporation says owners who breach the noise bylaw may be fined whatever amount the board considers suitable. Is this sanction bylaw sufficient under the Condominium Property Act?

1. Yes, because a sanction bylaw may be general rather than specific in its application.
2. Yes, provided the board judges that the fine is reasonable when it imposes the fine.
3. No, because a bylaw allowing fines must set out the amount or a range of amounts.
4. No, because fines for bylaw breaches are set by the Court of King's Bench on application.

(CPA current as of May 14, 2026) Section 35(2)(b) of the Condominium Property Act requires a bylaw that allows monetary sanctions to set out the amount or the range of amounts. Section 35(3) lets a sanction bylaw be general in application but does not remove that requirement, and the reasonableness test in section 35(4) applies in addition to it. The corporation sets sanctions by bylaw and goes to court only to enforce unpaid ones under section 36.

12. The bylaws of Harbour Point Condominium Corporation allow chargebacks. An occupant's act damages common property, and the repair costs exceed the corporation's insurance deductible. If the corporation files no claim, what is the most it may charge back to the owner under section 39.01?

1. The deductible limit of the policy, as the lesser of the costs and that limit.
2. Nothing, because a chargeback requires that an insurance claim be filed first.
3. The deductible plus the corporation's legal costs, whatever the total comes to.
4. The full repair cost, because the occupant's own act is what caused the damage.

(CPA current as of May 14, 2026) Section 39.01(3) of the Condominium Property Act sets the chargeback at the lesser of the actual and reasonable related costs and the deductible limit of the corporation's policy, whether or not a claim is made. The full cost is therefore capped, a claim is not a precondition, and legal costs are not added to the deductible. Note that section 39.01 covers chargebacks, not the special levy of section 39.1.

13. A supply line fails inside unit 8 and floods the units below. An engineer's report finds that the line was defectively installed when the building was constructed. The board wants to recover the corporation's deductible from the owner of unit 8. What is the position?

1. The owner is liable up to the deductible, because the damage originated in the unit.
2. The owner is not liable, because the damage came from a construction defect.
3. The owner is liable for the full repair cost, because the line serves that unit alone.
4. The owner is liable if the corporation also files an insurance claim for the loss.

(CPR current as of February 15, 2026) Section 62.4(3) of the Condominium Property Regulation makes an owner liable up to the deductible for damage originating in the unit, but section 62.4(6)(a) removes that liability when the damage came from a construction defect. Liability is capped at the deductible rather than the full cost, and section 62.4(2) says no insurance claim is needed to recover it.

14. Eastgate Commercial Condominium Corporation has only non-residential units, and its bylaws require no extra insurance. After a fire, an owner asks whether the corporation had to insure the fixtures and finishing inside her office unit. What is the correct answer?

1. No, the minimum is the replacement value of the unit, excluding its fixtures and finishing.
2. Yes, because fixtures and finishing form part of the common property for insurance purposes.
3. No, because the corporation insures common property and not the units themselves.
4. Yes, the corporation must insure them as described in a standard insurable unit description.

(CPA current as of May 14, 2026; CPR current as of February 15, 2026) Section 47(1)(a) of the Condominium Property Act requires the corporation to insure the units, and section 61.1(2)(c) of the Condominium Property Regulation sets the minimum for a non-residential unit at its replacement value, which for greater certainty excludes the fixtures and finishing. The standard insurable unit description applies to residential units, and fixtures inside a unit are not common property. The owner should arrange cover for them unless the bylaws say otherwise.