Where there's smoke there's...a cannabis allergy
While condominiums are rushing to get updated smoking rules in place before the upcoming cannabis legalization, a recent article published by the CBC suggests another potential issue to worry about in the rule enactment and subsequent enforcement stages.
The CBC article, “Woman’s deadly cannabis allergy highlights complexity of condo living”, published on September 20th sheds light on the fact that condominiums should be aware of potential competing human rights claims. The article addresses an instance where a person, named Adele, suffering from a life-threatening allergy to cannabis and cannabis smoke resides in the same condominium that has active registered medical cannabis users. The article raises the question of how to handle competing and directly contradictory health concerns.
The answer of what to do in this instance where there are competing health concerns (and thusly potential human rights issues) within a condominium is unclear.
On one hand, a blanket rule prohibiting cannabis consumption within a unit may give rise to a human rights violation as it would prevent registered medical cannabis users from such use. On the other hand, allowing even just registered medical cannabis users to smoke cannabis within their unit would impose the potential of smoke finding its way out of the unit. Smoke seeping out of a unit may create another human rights violation if the smoke is able to come into contact with a person such as Adele who has a life-threatening allergy to it.
In the article, Adele states that already in her condominium cannabis smoke is leaking into hallways and into the ventilation system to the point that Adele never uses her balcony, puts towels against her door, uses two air purifiers, and tries to avoid all common areas except the laundry room.
It is ultimately up to the condominium board to find a way to accommodate both sides of this issue without violating the legitimate concerns and requirements for both sides. The board in Adele’s case is exploring options including banning smoking on Adele’s floor, making structural changes to units, and exploring whether medical marijuana users can use other means instead of smoking, such as oils or edibles.
Even if not currently faced with a similar situation, consideration of the possibility and careful rule drafting are important. Although there is no firm answer to the matter, condominium boards should ensure that rules are in place to allow control over cannabis consumption. Even if the condominium is to allow smoking, rules should allow the board to restrict smoking if it is causing a nuisance or is posing a health risk to other unit owners. While outright restricting cannabis consumption for registered medical users is likely not a good idea, condominiums may be able to restrict smoking and allow cannabis consumption through other means (such as edibles).
Restricting medical cannabis use to non-smoking means still may not be appropriate if a medical user is able to show that they are required to smoke or vaporize to achieve their doctor-prescribed treatment. This, however, may be case specific, and a restriction to consumption through non-smoking means unless medically necessary is seemingly one of the best options to take as a starting point.
Condominium corporations, moving forward, must be mindful that any condominium could face the same conflicting concerns that the board in Adele’s situation is trying to resolve. It is better to take precautionary actions in this case than to wait and take reactionary measures once an issue arises.
This post was written by Justin Black. Justin is an articling student at Robson Carpenter LLP working with both the condominium management group and the condominium and subdivision development group.