Condominium Associations' Power to Restrict Access to Areas on the Property
Condominiums cannot impose restrictions that directly conflict with emergency orders issued by state and local government agencies (government orders) but can enforce their own governing documents in accordance with applicable law.
August 14, 2020 at 10:22 AM
5 minute read
With this week's news of the skyrocketing increase in COVID-19 cases occurring throughout Florida (the emergency), many condominium associations, condominium unit owners and outside service providers, including real estate brokers, may be confused about a condominium association's authority to restrict access to the common areas and condominium units located within the condominium property.
Condominiums cannot impose restrictions that directly conflict with emergency orders issued by state and local government agencies (government orders) but can enforce their own governing documents in accordance with applicable law, (including the Condominium Statute, Florida Statutes Chapter 718). This can include rules that are more stringent than required by government orders. Florida Statutes Section 718.1265(g) provides condominium associations with broad emergency powers, including the power to prevent access to specific parts of the common elements such as swimming pools and gyms. While these provisions originally appeared applicable only to emergencies resulting in physical damage, such as hurricanes, the authors believe that, when read in conjunction with the various recent government orders, COVID constitutes an emergency situation that affords condominium associations the right to use these emergency powers to regulate use of the condominium property during the pendency of the emergency. Here are some common questions and answers:
- Can a condominium association entirely prevent access to the condominium property by people who are not actual owners/residents of the condominium?
No. Condominiums cannot entirely ban entry onto the condominium property by nonresidents. Most declarations provide that unit owners have an absolute right of passage to their units, for themselves and their invitees and there appears to be no government order to the contrary.
- If a condominium association cannot prevent access entirely, can the condominium association restrict entry to the condominium property and regulate behavior within the condominium property?
Yes. Condominium associations absolutely can regulate entry into the condominium property and regulate use of the common areas within the condominium. Condominium associations may rely on government orders to insist upon social distancing and face coverings whenever anyone, unit owner or otherwise, enters into the common elements of the condominium. This would include hallways, elevators, garages and lobbies, as well as gyms and swimming pools (which are covered by additional stricter government orders).
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLeveraging the Power of Local Chambers of Commerce: A Second-Career Lawyer’s Guide to Building a Thriving Practice
5 minute readCFPB Proposes Rule to Regulate Data Brokers Selling Sensitive Information
5 minute readEssential Labor Shifts: Navigating Noncompetes, Workplace Politics and the AI Revolution
Initial Steps to Set Up a Fla. Appeal: Your Future Self (or Appellate Attorney) Will Thank You
6 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250