79-81 Berry Street North Sydney

Questions to ask before you bid

• 1

  The building's builder is named in disputes at other schemes, is the original builder still solvent for a warranty claim?

  Because Brookfield Australia Investments Ltd appears at 2 schemes.

• 2

  What by-laws apply to pets, parking, short-stay letting, and renovations, and have any been disputed?

  Because we found a by-law matter on record.

• 3

  What is the capital works (sinking) fund balance, its adequacy ratio, and the 10-year plan?

• 4

  Are any special levies raised, proposed, or scoped-but-not-yet-levied?

• 5

  Can I see the last two years of AGM minutes, including any motions that were defeated?

Litigation

• The Owners – Strata Plan 74602 v Eastmark Holdings Pty Ltd; Eastmark Holdings Pty Ltd v The Owners – Strata Plan 74602 [2016] NSWSC 496

  Other NSWSC 22 April 2016

  JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS - matters arising from earlier

• The Owners – Strata Plan 74602 v Eastmark Holdings Pty Ltd; Eastmark Holdings Pty Ltd v The Owners – Strata Plan 74602 [2015] NSWSC 1981

  By-laws NSWSC 24 December 2015

  STRATA TITLES – mixed residential, commercial, retail and car parking development – allocation of the costs of shared services – proper construction of strata management statement – whether allocation of costs of shared services under strata management statement fair and reasonable – whether strata management statement an unjust contract for the purposes of the Contracts Review Act 1980 – whether strata management statement should be re-written – whether any amendment to strata management statem

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 74602 v Brookfield Australia Investments Ltd [2015] NSWSC 1916

  Other NSWSC 16 December 2015

  BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION – design and construct contract between developer and first defendant – plaintiff successor in title to developer – whether first defendant breached statutory warranties under s 18B(a), (b) and (f) of the Home Building Act 1989, as incorporated into the contract – whether facade was designed and constructed in accordance with the “Hyder Specification” as incorporated in the contract – proper construction of the Hyder Specification – whether a reasonable businessperson w

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 74602 v Brookfield Australia Investments Ltd [2015] NSWSC 1682

  Other NSWSC 12 November 2015

  PROCEDURE – application for leave to reopen – applicable principles – factors relevant to exercise of discretion – lengthy hearing –

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 74602 v Brookfield Australia Investments Ltd [2015] NSWSC 1144

  Other NSWSC 11 August 2015

  EVIDENCE – admissibility – discretion to exclude or limit the use of evidence – whether lay observational evidence adduced by plaintiff after cut-off date of “guillotine order” is evidence-in-chief or in reply – if in chief, whether leave should be given to adduce that evidence – whether defendants would be prejudiced if that evidence is admitted – whether use of evidence should be limited to exclude evidence of April 2015 storm event

• Eastmark Holdings v The Owners Corporation Strata Plan No 74602 [2014] NSWSC 134

  Other NSWSC 21 February 2014

  JUDGMENTS & ORDERS - Judgments - Summary

• The Owners - Strata Plan No. 74602 v Eastmark Holdings Pty Limited [2013] NSWCA 221

  Costs and procedure NSWCA 19 July 2013

  PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - legal professional privilege - where privilege asserted by owners corporation against lot owner - whether common or joint interest applies - where subpoenaed documents related to a proceeding that lot owner pursued solely for benefit of owners corporation and in which lot owner sought no relief against owners corporation - where owners corporation sought to dispute that claim by lot owner - where subpoenaed documents also related to other proceedings in which owners corp

• Eastmark Holdings Pty Ltd v Owners Strata Plan 74602 [2009] NSWSC 1483

  Costs and procedure NSWSC 11 December 2009

  COSTS – where plaintiff seeks leave to discontinue proceedings in light of action taken by defendant after proceedings instituted which removes need for further proceedings – where plaintiff’s success is only partial – whether to depart from ordinary costs consequences of discontinuance.

Decisions naming this scheme as a party, from NSW Caselaw (NCAT and the courts). The line beneath each matter is the decision's own catchwords, quoted; the topic tag is our grouping of those words and reads "Other" when they do not clearly fit, so you can always check it against the source. Every matter links to the full decision. Whether a matter helped or hurt the scheme is not assessed here.