The destination of the building is an important concept as it constitutes a major restriction on co-owner’s proprietary interests, at the same time as ensuring their protection.[57] The destination focuses on the quality and character of a building by giving it a “personality”[58] based on objective, subjective and collective elements.[59] Therefore, the destination of the building is the sum of many factors which contributes to its own definition.

A) Objective elements: Geographic location, environment, material used, layout, degree of luxury;

B) Subjective elements: Considerations which motivates a buyer to purchase, conditions to which a buyer who became a co-owner purchased his/her fraction of the building; and

C) Collective elements: General interests of all co-owners, and whether their interest in the building are represented and preserved.

The function of the destination of the building is twofold:[60]

  1. The declaration of co-ownership cannot restrain individual rights over private portions unless justified by the destination of the building.[61]
  2. Each co-owner must exercise their right of enjoyment without infringing other’s right of enjoyment, or the destination of the building.[62]

Consequently, the destination of the building is a reference point to which co-owners are not entitled to displace, unless in accordance with the amendment mechanism provided by law under Art. 1098 C.C.Q.

The destination of the building is a relevant concept when dealing with:[63]


-Leasing of units (leasing, Airbnb);

-Activity within a private unit;

Flooring and soundproofing;

Parking; and

-Other privative layouts and arrangements.

Whenever exercising one’s rights, or seeking to modify the declaration of co-ownership, it is crucial to determine whether such an exercise of a right would impact the destination of the building.

[57] Christine Gagnon, La Copropriété Divise (Montréal: Edition Yvon Blais, 2015) at p. 112.

[58] Ibid at p. 113.

[59] Wilson v. Syndicat des copropriétaires du Condominium Le Champlain 1996 QCCS 4562.

[60] Christine Gagnon, La Copropriété Divise (Montréal: Edition Yvon Blais, 2015) at p. 113.

[61] C.C.Q. Art. 1056.

[62] C.C.Q. Art. 1063.

[63]Christine Gagnon, La Copropriété Divise (Montréal: Edition Yvon Blais, 2015) at p. 120.

If you are looking for a law firm with reasonable rates, quick and efficient turnaround time for your files and who provides personalized and effective follow-ups, call Schneider Attorneys at (514) 439-1322 ext. 112 or email us at

The above noted text should not be construed as providing legal advice or a statement of your claim. The process highlighted above are merely parameters and barometers and do not constitute any warranties and guaranties with regards to your file at hand. We strongly recommend that you seek legal advice with a licensed attorney from the Barreau du Quebec or a notary at the Chambre des Notaires. Each case must be seen and analysed on its merits as the legal process may be complex and cumbersome.

Start typing and press Enter to search