Decisions table

Amendment of unit entitlements - Whether if allocated at the time of application, schedule of unit entitlements would require amendment - Whether unit entitlements proportionate to the value of each lot relative to the sum of the value of all the lots in the strata titles scheme - Capital valuation

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

GENERAL MEETING – COMMITTEE MEETING – COSTS – where legislation requires meeting minutes to be distributed within 21 days – where owner complains that body cororate has not issued meeting minutes propmptly – whether to order that meeting minutes be issued within the period required by law – whether it is appropriate to make an order wich does no more than restate the law – whether to order costs against the applicant Act, ss 77(1); 94C

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

CONTRIBUTIONS – where committee refused to reinstate a lost discount – whether there were special reasons to allow the discount – whether the committee acted unreasonably in refusing to allow the discount. Act, s94, 100(5); Standard Module, s166(6)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

GENERAL MEETING PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ELECTION – GENERAL MEETING MOTIONS – whether there were defects in the conduct of the annual general meeting– whether the committee nomination and election processes were valid – whether motions were properly considered – whether the meeting should be invalidated. Act, ss 94(2), 100, 242; Commercial Module, ss 14, 40, 56

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BY-LAWS – where the applicant complains of intrusive noise from the lot above that she attributes to inadequate acoustic insulation beneath the vinyl flooring and tools being used within the lot – where the vinyl flooring was installed by a previous owner of the lot – whether the flooring was installed in compliance with the by-laws – whether the present owner must engage an acoustic engineer to test the floor’s compliance with the by-laws, change the flooring, or take other measures to reduce the noise in the applicant’s lot. Act, ss 167, 270(1)(e).

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BY-LAW – where a lot owner complains of noise from the lot above – where a by-law requires owners to take all reasonable steps to minimize noise from moving furniture on hard floors – whether the body corporate ought to be ordered to issue a contravention notice to the owner. Act, s 182

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

CHANGE OF FINANCIAL YEAR – whether an order should be made to change the body corporate’s financial year. Act, s283

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

PROPERTY DAMAGE – COSTS - where the applicant says defects on their balconies were caused by the failure of the waterproof membrane and the actions of the body corporate’s window-cleaning contractors – whether the body corporate should reimburse the applicant for repair costs – whether the body corporate must carry out repairs – whether the body corporate is liable for other damage and other costs. Act, s 281; Standard Module, ss 180, 211

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

COMMITTEE - Eligibility to be Voting Member of Committee- where member of committee receives payment for ad hoc maintenance work – whether a “service contractor” - whether member of committee has complied with Code of Conduct for committee members GENERAL MEETINGS – requirements for minutes of meetings MOTIONS - Validity of motion - Requirements for valid general meeting motions COSTS – jurisdiction of adjudicator to award cost to applicant. Act, ss 15, 101B, 270, Schedule 1A, 280; Standard Module, ss 10, 98, 117

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

GENERAL MEETING MOTION – CONTRIBUTIONS – CARETAKER – LETTING AGENT – EXPENDITURE – REASONABLENESS – where resolutions purported to raise a special levy but did not comply with legislated requirements for raising special levies – whether to declare resolutions void for that reason – where resolutions authorised substantial expenditure for works and asset purchases based on attached quotations but granted the building manager discretion to choose alternative suppliers or products – whether the resolutions constituted an unlawful delegation of a body corporate power – where resolution authorised purchase of a motor vehicle to be used at the building manager’s discretion – whether the purchase was beyond the scope of the body corporate’s power to acquire personal property – where multiple lot owner cast the majority of votes but did not own the majority of lots – where resolutions alleged to improperly benefit that owner to the detriment of other owners – whether ‘fraud on the minority’ applies – where resolution purported to amend caretaker agreement to allow caretaker to spend substantial sums without body corporate approval – whether passing resolution was unreasonable – where resolutions purport to amend letting agent agreement in respect of exclusivity of rights to let lots – whether passing resolutions was unreasonable\_‑\_ Act, ss 94(2); 97 Accommodation Module, ss 152(2); 179(2)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BODY CORPORATE RECORDS – where body corporate provided lot owner with copies of body corporate records, whether body corporate had valid basis for invoicing lot owner – whether committee for body corporate acted reasonably and in compliance with code of conduct in its dealings with lot owner about the records and invoice – whether lot owner should be reimbursed for expenses and costs of conciliation and adjudication applications. Act, ss 205, 252E(5)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BY-LAWS – where the body corporate and a lot owner disagree over the boundaries of the lot’s exclusive use area – where the lot owner has exclusively occupied and improved the disputed area without body corporate authority – whether the disputed area is part of the exclusive use area – whether the lot owner has breached a by-law against unauthorised changes to common property Act, s 59

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• Akhil Sethi lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 93392 owners corp

Proceedings dismissed as frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process, with plaintiff ordered to pay defendant's costs on an indemnity basis.

COMMITTEE DECISION – RESTRICTED ISSUE – where the committee consented to a person making an application to local government for a material change of use of a lot – whether the decision was a restricted issue for the committee Accommodation Module, s 44

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

REASONABLENESS – where committee consented to lot owner lodging material change of use application with local council – whether the decision was made unreasonably. Act, s 100(5)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

Costs – strata renewal plan – application for an order giving effect to – discontinuance of proceedings – statutory provision that owners corporation pay dissenting owner’s costs – otherwise order for costs sought

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

NUISANCE / HAZARD – where the respondent smokes on Lot 7’s balcony – where the occupiers of Lot 32 say they are exposed to second-hand smoke and allege this is causing a nuisance, a hazard, or an unreasonable interference – where the respondent is no longer an occupier in the scheme – whether the application should be dismissed Act, ss 227, 270

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

Change of body corporate’s financial year\_. Act, ss 276, 283\_

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• Heather Gee lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 32191 owners corp

The Appeal Panel refused leave to appeal and dismissed the appellant's appeal against the Tribunal's dismissal of her application for appointment of a compulsory strata manager.

TOWING – where a vehicle appears to have been abandoned on common property – whether the body corporate can tow the vehicle. Act, s 94(2), 100(5)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

INSURANCE – whether the body corporate is entitled to recover an insurance excess payment from the applicant in relation to damage caused by the applicant’s tenant to common property and/or another lot. COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS – whether committee members had a conflict of interest in relation to motions to allow several lots, including theirs, to park on common property – whether the motions purported to allow owners to obstruct common property in contravention of the by-laws. Act, ss 94(1)(a), 100(5); Standard Module, ss 66(1)-(2), 166(1)(c), 203(3)-(4).

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT STATEMENT – where exclusive use rights have been reallocated – where the validity of the reallocation is disputed - whether an extension of time should be granted for the body corporate to record a new CMS recording the reallocation. Act, s176

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

GENERAL MEETING MOTION – where the body corporate resolved to reimburse an owner for goods damaged by flooding on common property – whether the resolution was valid. Act, s 94; Accommodation Module, ss 58, 105, 152, 170

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

GENERAL MEETING – whether notices of extraordinary general meeting were properly distributed – whether allegations of pre-filled voting forms are substantiated – whether committee followed procedures to approve motions for general meeting – whether individual motions and resolutions were valid. Act, s 100(5); Accommodation Module, ss 79, 125, 147, 174

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION – validity of resolution authorising erection of fence. Act, ss 100(5),163; Accommodation Module, s 176

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

MAINTENANCE – where the applicants are experiencing noise from exhaust fans in the basement carpark – where the exhaust fans are the responsibility of the principal body corporate – whether orders against the subsidiary body corporate are warranted. Act, ss 94, 100

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

NUISANCE / HAZARD / INSURANCE – where the parties reside in a duplex and the applicant alleges the respondent is causing a nuisance and a hazard by accumulating rubbish in front of Lot 1 – where the applicant is seeking to be reimbursed for the respondent’s portion of the scheme’s insurance premium – whether the orders sought by the applicant are warranted in the circumstances. Act, ss 59(2), 167, 185(2), 270, 280

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

Owners Corporations

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

REASONABLENESS – where awning extends from the front of the scheme – where body corporate records silent as to whether the awning was constructed for the body corporate or the owner of Lot 1 – where local government required repairs to the awning – where the body corporate paid to have awning repairs undertaken – where body corporate then resolved to recover the amount from Lot 1 – whether there was a reasonable basis for the body corporate to assert that the lot owner was responsible for the maintenance – whether it was therefore unreasonable for the body corporate to pass the resolution REASONABLENESS – INSURANCE – CONTRIBUTIONS – where body corporate passed resolution to adjust contributions payable by a lot for reinstatement insurance premiums levied for past years – whether the power to adjust the contributions can be exercised retrospectively – meaning of ‘payable’ – whether reasonable to use the power retrospectively Act, s 94(2); Small Scheme Module, s 120

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BY-LAWS – whether owner has failed to keep his lot in good condition; whether there has been a breach of by-laws – whether orders are warranted. Standard Module, 211

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• Northern Beaches Council government
• The Owners - Strata Plan No 7114 owners corp

The hearing scheduled for 16 and 17 November 2023 was vacated, orders 5 to 16 made on 25 May 2023 were vacated, and the proceedings were listed for further directions not before 1 March 2024 due to the Tribunal being deprived of jurisdiction over issues that are the subject of concurrent District Court proceedings.

Owners Corporations

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• Peter McDaid lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No. 60346 owners corp

The application was dismissed; the Tribunal found that while common property waterproofing was in disrepair, the lot owner failed to substantiate his damages claim for lost rent and failed to provide a sufficiently detailed scope of works to support a work order, and there were no grounds to appoint a compulsory strata manager or remove the strata committee member from office.

BY-LAWS – whether the respondent has parked on common property contrary to the scheme’s by-laws – whether the applicant body corporate should be permitted to tow offending vehicles Act, ss 94 and 184

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

GENERAL MEETING RESOLUTION – whether a resolution to re-engage a caretaking service contractor ought to be deemed void because owners were misled or underinformed, the body corporate acted unreasonably by imposing financial hardship on owners, or the motion, voting, or explanatory material were otherwise irregular. Act, ss 94(2), 270(1)(c)&(3); Accommodation Module, ss 58(1)-(2), 76(3), 80, 92(2), 125(2)(c)(i)(A), 127(2)(a)(i), 128(2)(a), 130(1), 131(1), 140.

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS – where the committee made decisions about electricity supply and toilet facility access for retail lots that are not part of the community titles scheme but governed by a building management statement – whether the decisions were valid – whether the committee acted reasonably – whether there is good reason to waive the time limit for lodging the application. Act, ss 94, 100(5), 242

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• Robert Klewer lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan 70149 owners corp

The application seeking orders to set aside decisions of the Owners Corporation regarding payment plans, interest waiver, reimbursement for repairs, unit valuations, action against adjoining owner, and common property repairs was dismissed.

INTERIM ORDER – whether an interim order is warranted. Act, s 279

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

RESOLUTIONS – where committee proposed works to common property timber balustrades, whether works are maintenance requiring an ordinary resolution or improvements requiring a special resolution – where cost of works exceeded major spending limit, whether it was not practicable for exceptional reasons to obtain more than one quote for the works – whether committee decisions made at informal meetings were valid. Act s 106; Accommodation Module, ss 162, 163, 170, 176

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

INTERIM ORDER – where body corporate resolved to remove fence – where applicant challenges the reasonableness of the body corporate’s decision – whether interim order should be granted in the circumstances. Act, s279(1)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• Lucineh Amirchian lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan no 99357 owners corp

The Appeal Panel upheld the appeal, set aside the first instance decision dismissing the application, and ordered the Respondent to pay the Appellant $7500 compensation for lost rental income due to the Respondent's breach of its duty to maintain and repair common property following water leakage.

• Ruihui Ma lot owner
• The Owners - Strata Plan No 65870 owners corp
• Michael Lehner lot owner
• Professional Strata Management Group manager
• Network Strata Services Pty Ltd manager

Network Strata Services Pty Ltd was appointed as the strata managing agent for 12 months in preference to Professional Strata Management Group due to doubts about PSMG's competence based on prior failures, with no order as to costs.

APPOINTMENT OF ADMINISTRATOR – whether circumstances indicate that the body corporate is so dysfunctional as to warrant appointment of administrator Act, ss 227, 228, 276, 284, 301

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• Paul Thomas Butt lot owner
• The Owners - Strata Plan No 71715 owners corp
• John O'Donnell lot owner

The application was dismissed as the orders sought were misconceived and lacked utility, particularly because the transformer room complained of is located on property owned by the City of Sydney and leased to Ausgrid, not on common property of the Owners Corporation.

BODY CORPORATE RECORDS – whether the body corporate has validly requested the return of body corporate property - whether the respondent has failed to comply with the request. Accommodation Module, s 224

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BY-LAWS – whether the respondent has parked vehicles on common property visitor parking spaces in breach of the by-law – whether orders are warranted - COSTS – whether the respondent should reimburse the applicant’s application fees. Act, ss 94, 185

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

INTERIM ORDER – whether interim orders should be granted in the circumstances. Act, s279(1)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

CONTRAVENTION OF SCHEME BY-LAWS Act, ss 182-188

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

GENERAL MEETING RESOLUTION; IMPROVEMENT TO COMMON PROPERTY; EXCLUSIVE USE – where the body corporate invalidly purported to grant a lot exclusive use of common property and permission to erect a fence – where the exclusive use resolution was subsequently rescinded and another resolution passed requiring the removal of the fence – where other lots have also been improperly granted exclusive use of common property yet have not had that rescinded nor been required to remove their fences - whether the body corporate acted reasonably in requiring the removal of the fence – whether the resolution ought to be declared void. Act, ss 35(1), 62(2)&(3)(a), 94(2), 337(2)(g), 339(5); Building Units and Group Titles Act 1980, s 30.

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

COMMITTEE DECISION – where an owner of numerous lots requested the body corporate committee to record a new Community Management Statement (CMS) recording the amalgamation of those lots – where new plans and CMS have been prepared by lot owner but body corporate requires these to be reviewed by the body corporate’s solicitor at the expense of the lot owner. Act, ss 51C, 63, 94(2), 100(5)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.