Janini v. London Townhouses: Condo Duty to Co-Owners
Back to BlogMichigan HOA Law

Janini v. London Townhouses: Condo Duty to Co-Owners

8 min read·July 11, 2024·Updated October 24, 2026·Tammy Robinson, Property Manager

In July 2024 the Michigan Supreme Court held co-owners are invitees in common areas the association controls, overruling Francescutti. What boards must do.

Quick Answer

On July 11, 2024, the Michigan Supreme Court decided Janini v London Townhouses Condominium Association, No. 164158 (514 Mich 86). The Court held that when a master deed and bylaws make the association responsible for maintaining the common areas and co-owners lack possession and control over them, a co-owner using those areas is an invitee, and the association owes a common-law duty to exercise reasonable care. The decision reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded the case. It also overruled the earlier Court of Appeals decision in Francescutti v Fox Chase Condominium Association, 312 Mich App 640 (2015), which had barred co-owners from bringing premises liability claims against their own associations.

Background

The question was whether a co-owner injured in the common elements of a condominium can sue the association for premises liability. The Court of Appeals had said no, reasoning that because a co-owner holds an interest in the common elements, the co-owner is neither a licensee nor an invitee. The Supreme Court disagreed.

The Holding

  • Possession and control matter, not just ownership. The Court said the proper inquiry in a premises liability case is who has possession and control over the land where the person was injured, not merely who owns it.
  • Co-owners are invitees in these circumstances. Where the master deed and bylaws give the association the duty to maintain common areas and co-owners lack possession and control, a co-owner using them is an invitee.
  • Duty of reasonable care. An invitee is entitled to the highest level of protection in premises liability law: the association must exercise reasonable care to protect against unreasonable risks of harm from dangerous conditions of the land.
  • A landlord-tenant analogy. As later described by the Court of Appeals, the Court likened the association-owner relationship to landlord and tenant, since owners pay assessments to have the association maintain the common elements and cede individual authority over them.

Why It Matters More Than the Headline

Before Janini, many associations assumed they owed their own members little or no premises duty. After it, owner injury claims on parking lots, walkways, stairs and other common elements can proceed under ordinary negligence rules. The decision has also driven later cases. In July 2026 the Court of Appeals relied on Janini to treat a short-term rental guest as an invitee of the association; see our summary of Letvin.

What the Decision Does Not Mean

It does not make an association an insurer of every injury. The plaintiff still must prove breach, causation and harm, and the association can raise defenses, such as the open and obvious nature of a condition. The outcome also depends on the governing documents: the holding turns on the association being responsible for maintaining the common areas and co-owners lacking possession and control, so unusual document language or limited common elements may change the analysis. Ask your attorney how your master deed and bylaws allocate responsibility.

Board Action Checklist

  • Read your documents. Identify who is responsible for each common and limited common element.
  • Adopt written inspection routines for walkways, stairs, lighting, parking areas and amenities, and keep dated records.
  • Manage vendors actively. Require insurance, indemnity and additional-insured status, and verify performance, especially for snow and ice. See our vendor management guide.
  • Review insurance. Confirm general liability limits and discuss owner-injury claims with your agent. See board member liability and D&O insurance.
  • Document hazard reports and repairs promptly.

How APM Helps

APM sets up inspection schedules, vendor oversight and incident logs for Michigan associations. See our Michigan resources or contact us.

Source: Janini v London Townhouses Condominium Association, Mich Sup Ct No. 164158 (July 11, 2024). Later-case characterizations come from Letvin v Village at Grand Traverse Commons Condominium Association, Mich Ct App No. 376558 (July 13, 2026). This article is general information, not legal advice. Last verified October 24, 2026.

What Will APM Cost for Your Community?

Adjust the sliders below — your estimate updates instantly.

Number of Homes / Doors
50
10500
Board Meetings per Year
4
112

Facilities & Common Areas

Recommended: Remote Essentials Plan
$12.08/ door / mo
Base rate $12 – $13.20 / door / mo
Est. Monthly
$600 – $604
Est. Annual
$7,200 – $7,248
Homes50
Meetings / yr4
Facilities0

Straightforward communities that mainly need financial tools and dues collection.

Get My Free Proposal →

Free. No obligation. Delivered in 3 business days.

✓500+ communities served✓98% client retention✓No sales call required

Ready to work with Association Property Managers?

Get a free, itemized proposal for your community — delivered within 3 business days.

Request a Free Proposal