2017 ORS 100.310¹
Rights of tenants in conversion

(1) Prior to the sale of any dwelling unit which is to be retained as a unit in the conversion condominium without substantial alteration in its physical layout, the declarant shall first offer to sell the respective unit to the tenant who occupies the unit. The offer shall:

(a) Terminate 60 days after its receipt or upon written rejection of the offer by the tenant, whichever occurs earlier.

(b) Be accompanied by a copy of all applicable disclosure statements issued by the Real Estate Commissioner pursuant to ORS 100.700 (Inspection of condominium).

(c) Not constitute a notice to terminate the tenancy.

(2) The tenant’s dwelling unit may not be shown to any prospective purchasers of a conversion condominium unit without the tenant’s permission before the termination of the tenancy.

(3) The declarant shall not sell the unit to a person other than the tenant during the 60 days following the termination of an offer to the tenant under subsections (1) and (2) of this section at a price or on terms more favorable to the purchaser than the price or terms offered to the tenant.

(4) After the property has been submitted to the provisions of the Oregon Condominium Act, the declarant, until a unit is offered for sale in accordance with subsections (1) and (2) of this section, shall notify in writing any prospective tenant, prior to the commencement of the tenancy, that the property has been submitted to the provisions of the Oregon Condominium Act and the rights of a tenant under subsections (1) to (3) of this section. [Formerly 94.122; 1997 c.816 §8]

(formerly 94.122)

Law Review Cita­tions

16 WLR 260 (1979)

(formerly 94.004 to 94.480)

See also annota­tions under ORS 91.505 to 91.675 in permanent edi­tion.

Notes of Decisions

Even if declara­tions filed for purpose of bringing develop­ment within condominium law were defective for failure to conform to statutory require­ments, develop­ment was not vitiated but deficiencies would constitute mis­take in transac­tion thus making instru­ment eligible for reforma­tion in equity. Dickey v. Barnes, Mossberg, 268 Or 226, 519 P2d 1252 (1974)

Developers of planned unit develop­ments which are not organized as condominiums cannot claim the tax advantages of the Unit Ownership Law. Brooks Resources v. Dept. of Rev., 276 Or 1177, 558 P2d 312 (1976)

Purchasers of condominium units are automatically members of the unit owners associa­tion and subject to its declara­tion and bylaws; where those declara­tions and bylaws provide discre­tion to the Board of Directors to assess for fees necessary to create a “unified plan for the develop­ment and opera­tion” of the condominium, and the purchaser has alleged no abuse of discre­tion, the judg­ment of the Board of Directors is upheld. Assn. of Unit Owners of the Inn of the Seventh Mountain v. Gruenfeld, 277 Or 259, 560 P2d 641 (1977)

Acquisi­tion of prop­erty by condominium associa­tion is not limited to prop­erty subject to annexa­tion require­ments. Gier’s Liquor v. Associa­tion of Unit Owners, 124 Or App 365, 862 P2d 560 (1993)

Law Review Cita­tions

16 WLR 253 (1979)

Chapter 100

Notes of Decisions

This chapter does not authorize regula­tion by the Real Estate Division of sales of “right to use” time share interests in condominiums. Royal Aloha Partners v. Real Estate Division, 59 Or App 564, 651 P2d 1350 (1982)

Law Review Cita­tions

18 WLR 95 (1982)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 100—Condominiums, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors100.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 100, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano100.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.