That quoted text from the ruling seems to suggest there might have been bits of the by-law that could apply in some circumstances. Perhaps it said something specific about how it would be handled if an animal were a proven nuisance? Otherwise, I think the ruling just says an owners corporation is welcome to have a bylaw saying whatever it likes but it would be of no effect to the extent that it contradicts existing legislation. Really that is just a restatement of what is in every strata legislation. An OC’s bylaws or articles or rules (different names in different places) generally only apply to the extent that they are not inconsistent with legislation. Find the inconsistency and you can disregard the bylaw.