Decisions table

Building and Property

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

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.

• The Owners-Strata Plan No 102171 owners corp
• Ceerose Pty Ltd builder
• Zone Q Milsons Point Development Pty Ltd developer
• Southern Cross Climate Control Pty Ltd contractor

The Tribunal dismissed the Owners Corporation's application to re-open the concluded hearing to make further submissions on the operation of the Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 regarding whether registered designs were required for rectification works.

• Richard Ferretti lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 8847 owners corp
• Barrofry Pty Ltd contractor

The plumber breached statutory warranties by installing a substandard shower that did not conform to the contract specification of a full standard 900mm x 900mm shower recess, and was ordered to rectify the work within 60 days and pay compensation for lost rent at $420 per week during rectification; the wall cracking claim was dismissed.

• Barbara Karpinski lot owner
• The Owners - Strata Plan No 1731 owners corp

The respondent's costs application was dismissed and each party was ordered to pay their own costs of the appeal.

• Griffinchuk No 1 Pty Ltd ATF Griffinchuk Family Trust lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 92745 owners corp

The Appeal Panel dismissed the appellant's appeal and ordered the appellant to pay the respondent's costs as agreed or as assessed, finding the respondent was entirely successful in defending against the appeal concerning water ingress claims.

ACCESS TO A LOT – where the body corporate has issued an entry notice seeking access to the respondent’s lot to facilitate balustrade replacement works at the scheme – where access has been refused – whether orders for access are required. Act, s 163

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

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDERS – where the applicant alleges there were irregularities in the committee election process and says the election is invalid – whether the interim orders sought by the applicant are warranted in the circumstances. Act, s 94; Accommodation Module, ss 14, 17-19, 27, 28

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

• Karimbla Properties (No.25) Pty Ltd lot owner
• The Owners-Strata Plan No. 71067 owners corp

The Tribunal dismissed the Owners Corporation's application for costs and rejected its application to rely on Reply submissions, finding no special circumstances warranted a costs order against Karimbla Properties.

• Vicki Harbison lot owner
• The Owners Strata Plan No 18715 owners corp
• Patsi Sladen lot owner

The Tribunal found the Owners Corporation breached its duty to maintain common property by failing to prevent water ingress into Lot 7, ordered repairs within 90 days, appointed a compulsory strata managing agent for two years, and awarded the applicant $8,079.03 in damages and reimbursement.

COMMITTEE MOTION – whether the applicant should be permitted to install a gate in the boundary fence. Act, s 101; Standard Module, ss 116, 187

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

• RL Company Holdings PL t/as Swimart North Strathfield contractor
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 88564 owners corp

The appeal was allowed, the primary refund order was set aside, and the strata scheme was ordered to immediately repay $11,331.81 to the supplier; the matter was remitted for re-hearing before a differently-constituted tribunal due to procedural unfairness and inadequate reasoning on the central issues of breach and causation.

• The Owners – Strata Plan No. 85119 owners corp
• Pareshkumar Patel lot owner
• Hemalataben Patel lot owner

The respondents must remove the unauthorised carport constructed on common property within 28 days and repair all damage caused to the common property by its installation or removal.

COMMITTEE MOTION – CODE OF CONDUCT – where the committee did not pass a motion submitted by the applicant – whether it failed to act reasonably – whether the committee code of conduct was breached – whether the body corporate should be required to implement the motion – whether sanctions should be imposed – COSTS – whether the application is vexatious, misconceived or without substance – whether costs should be awarded. Act, ss 100, 101B, 270

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

BY-LAWS - whether the volume and nature of communications from the respondent breach the by-laws. Act, s 59

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

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

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

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

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

• Hugh James McCullum lot owner
• Lissa Kristbjorg McCullum lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 15404 owners corp

A compulsory strata manager (Network Strata Services Pty Ltd t/as Netstrata) was appointed for 12 months to assess expert reports on ceiling and floor defects in common property, order further reports as necessary, and engage contractors to undertake inspection and remedial works; the owners corporation's cross-application seeking the lot owners' consent to a common property rights by-law was dismissed.

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

• Alexandr Troyanovsky lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 1260 owners corp

The appeal of procedural orders made by the Tribunal was dismissed; the application to extend time for filing the notice of appeal in relation to orders (1) to (5) was refused, and the appeal against order (6) was dismissed.

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

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

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 47035 owners corp
• Peta Athens lot owner

The proceedings were transferred to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal due to overlapping jurisdictional issues between the Supreme Court claim for unpaid levies and cross-claim for water damage already before NCAT.

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

• Ausbao (286 Sussex St) Pty Ltd lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No. 100777 owners corp

The defendant's motion to stay proceedings was dismissed; the court found the dispute regarding validity of convening general meetings was not about the Strata Management Statement and therefore did not fall within the expert determination procedures.

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

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

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

Building and Property

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

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

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

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

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

• Max Build Pty Ltd builder
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 54026 owners corp
• TOP Consulting Group (NSW) Pty Ltd consultant

The Owners Corporation's motion for further particulars and document discovery was largely dismissed; limited further particulars were ordered from Max Build on specific issues, and the Owners Corporation was ordered to pay TOP's costs of the motion forthwith.

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

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

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

• William McArthur lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No. 30924 owners corp

The application was dismissed; the Tribunal found the owners corporation acted within its statutory duty under section 106 of the SSMA in carrying out emergency repairs to the common property shower recess, and there was no breach of section 122(6) as the repair work achieved minimal compliance and was functionally effective.

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

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

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

• William Fegent lot owner
• The Owners - Strata Plan No 6544 owners corp

The Tribunal dismissed the applicant's application to invalidate resolutions relating to window replacement, finding that Motion 7 was a valid sustainability infrastructure resolution passed by simple majority and that the required consideration of costs under section 132B(1)(a) was met before the vote.

• Dianne Pellow lot owner
• The Owners-Strata Plan No 4152 owners corp

The application for an order requiring the owners corporation to install a ramp or platform lift at the building entrances was dismissed as the front and rear entrances were operating according to their original design and had not fallen into disrepair, thus there was no breach of the owners corporation's duty to renew or replace fittings and fixtures under section 106(2) of the Strata Schemes Management Act.

Two-lot scheme - Commercial premises - Application for costs by strata company - Onus on party seeking costs - Offers to settle - Whether offers made comply with State Administrative Tribunal Rules 2004 (WA) - Nature of dispute - Conduct of parties - Whether fair and reasonable to award costs - Objectives of Tribunal - How costs are to be considered in the exercise of discretion conferred on Tribunal - Broad brush approach as a matter of impression and without attempt at mathematical precision

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

• Angela Nicholson lot owner
• The Owners - Strata Plan No 104042 owners corp
• Veinita Wodrow lot owner

Special By-Law 1 regulating short-term rental accommodation was declared invalid in its entirety as harsh, unconscionable and oppressive due to administration fee and bond provisions, and application for compulsory strata managing agent was dismissed.

Preliminary issue whether complaint withdrawn before Building Commissioner and therefore not referred to the Tribunal - Preliminary issue as to the scope of a complaint item which has been referred to the Tribunal by the Building Commissioner - Heritage development - Whether works faulty or unsatisfactory - Exercise of discretion in making building remedy order

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

• Owners Corporation PS536794T owners corp
• Hannah-Genevieve Novak lot owner
• Vasiliki Maragkou lot owner

A lot owner application for costs, after the owners corporation withdrew its common-property waterproofing claim, was dismissed.

• Adam Bowe lot owner
• James Washington Bailey lot owner
• The Owners - Strata Plan No 61040 owners corp

The Tribunal ordered the respondent lot owner to cease smoking tobacco products on courtyards and balconies of his lot and to prevent tobacco smoke from penetrating into the applicant's lot, finding the smoke drift constituted a nuisance and hazard in breach of statutory obligations and by-laws.