Construction doesn't have to stop on an apartment complex in the Falcon Ridge condo community off Falcon Drive.

That became clear Monday afternoon after Yukon Supreme Court Justice Ron Veale reserved his decision on an injunction to stop work on the project.

Whitehorse Condominium Corp. 95 owns 89 homes in Falcon Ridge.

The company applied for the injunction last month after developers – 37724 Yukon Inc. – had started building the apartment complex.

Jim Tucker, the lawyer for the condo corporation, and Gary Whittle, the lawyer representing the developers, presented their oral arguments in the case last Friday and yesterday.

Tucker argued that in order for the developers to go ahead with the project, they needed the proper consents from the home owners in Falcon Ridge.

While Tucker presented the main part of his argument Friday, Whittle brought forward his major points in the case through much of Monday's hearing.

He argued the condo corporation was well aware of the building going up, and pointed to plans made over the years for the development.

Veale continued to question Whittle throughout his arguments.

At one point, Whittle suggested it appeared to him that the judge had already made his mind up about the case.

"Don't tell me I've made my mind up,” Veale quickly replied, going on to state he was testing Whittle's arguments.

It took little time for Whittle to apologize and continue on with his arguments that the condo board knew of the plans for the apartment building through email, plans and other means.

Whittle proposed Veale order that the main part of Falcon Ridge (made up of chalet-style homes and duplexes) and the apartment building be divided into two separate entities, with common elements like Falcon Ridge's clubhouse being dealt with through a settlement agreement.

"That's not going to happen overnight,” Whittle said acknowledging that it would take time to reach an arrangement.

Each side, he said, could make submissions on how to go about it, with the court monitoring the process until its done.

In the alternative, Whittle said, the judge could make amendments to the condo corporation's bylaws, though he also suggested that could lead to further litigation by the board.

Throughout his arguments, Whittle continually pointed to case law and other documents filed with the court.

Responding to Whittle's points, Tucker said that though the apartment building may have identified in proposals submitted to the city, no such proposal is included in the "plan” on record with the land titles office.

He suggested that this would be the only plan that should be considered.

Even having city approval to go ahead with an apartment building does not mean the developer has the approval of the condo members, and their consent must first be obtained, Tucker emphasized.

He also argued against Veale separating the apartment building from the rest of Falcon Ridge, suggesting the goal of Whittle's application is to go ahead with the development without having to go through the condo board.

"They're looking for unrestrained development,” Tucker said.

He pointed out that dividing them would create a number of issues because road access to the apartment is through Falcon Ridge.

He also argued Veale should award special costs to be paid by the developer for its "reprehensible” behaviour.

He said the developer used bullying tactics when dealing with condo board president Helen Booth, threatening litigation.

Whittle replied to Tucker's statement, arguing the developer was simply stating the belief there was a breach and that she could face a lawsuit.

Given the amount of case law before him, Veale said, he would not be able to make a more immediate decision, recognizing that means construction can continue through Christmas.

After the hearing, Booth – who had been sitting in the courtroom throughout the hearing Monday – said she and the rest of the condo board will await Veale's decision and will likely comment more then.