Decisions table

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

Both summons issued at the applicant's request to produce documents were set aside as lacking reasonable particularity and amounting to fishing expeditions.

LAND LAW — Strata title — Resolution of disputes - Meetings of owners corporation – order sought under s 24 of the Strata Schemes Management Act invalidating resolution of and election held by owners corporation – Strata managing agent — Compulsory appointment of strata managing agent.

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.

Validity of AGM where alleged deficiencies with notice, minutes, motions, committee election; whether access to body corporate records wrongfully denied; whether EGM required. Act, ss 100(4), 106; Standard Module, ss 84, 87, 113, 117, 175, 176

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

LAND LAW — Strata title — Strata managing agent – where three owner corporations of Finger Wharf development at Woolloomooloo passed resolutions terminating appointment of strata managing agent and appointing new one – where strata managing agent is different to managing agent appointed for Wharf as a whole by building management committee as a result – where clause of strata management statement (“SMS”) required owners’ corporations to “appoint and retain” the same strata managing agent as the

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

ADJUDICATOR’S POWERS – whether an adjudicator can be satisfied that the body corporate is so dysfunctional that it cannot operate properly within the statutory framework that governs it. Act, ss 276, 301 Act

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

Application for interim order to erect temporary fencing in place of removed fencing and prevent erection of fence in new location – whether warranted in the circumstances. Act, ss 100(5), 163, 279; Accommodation Module, s 176

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

• Raymond Ross party
• Sarab Chami party
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 61667 owners corp

The application to extend time to lodge the application to reinstate appeal proceedings was refused, and the respondent's application for costs of the appeal was dismissed.

REASONABLENESS – where committee gave approval for owners to keep a dog, subject to a requirement to enter and exit the scheme with the dog via the carpark vehicular ramp and not via the main ground floor list lobby – whether the access condition was unreasonable. Act, s 100(5)

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

IMPROVEMENT TO A LOT – where the by-laws require body corporate approval for some alterations to a lot – where a request for approval was refused – whether the body corporate acted reasonably. IMPROVEMENT TO COMMON PROPERTY BY LOT OWNER – where body corporate approval required for alterations to common property – where request for approval was refused – whether the body corporate acted reasonably. Act, s 94(2) Accommodation Module\_,\_ ss 177

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

BY-LAWS – where the applicant says the respondent is parking on common property, leaving items on common property and has damaged a fence – whether the respondent is breaching the by-laws. Act, ss 182-188, 281

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

• Peter Maresh lot owner
• The Owners - Strata Plan No 13134 owners corp

The owners corporation must produce certain documents to the lot owner by 13 June 2023, but legal professional privilege was established for some documents relating to litigation advice.

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.

IMPROVEMENT TO LOT, IMPROVEMENT TO COMMON PROPERTY, DISPOSITION OF COMMON PROPERTY – where a motion to authorise the redevelopment of the respondent’s home, incorporating a second level in common property airspace, failed to achieve a resolution without dissent at a general meeting in 2011 but was subsequently declared passed when the sole dissenting owner withdrew her objection; where the respondent has now demolished his former home and built a new two-story dwelling in its place; whether the demolition and construction were properly authorised by resolution without dissent; whether the new home is at odds with the plans arguably approved in 2011; whether the respondent must rebuild his former home or some other design as may be approved by the body corporate by resolution without dissent. Act, s 242; Standard Module, ss 114, 117, 184(2)(a), 187.

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

• The Owners - Strata Plan No. 74442 owners corp
• Mandana Harrison lot owner
• Milo Brogan lot owner
• Carolyn Arnett lot owner
• Vasiliki Tsiavos lot owner
• Raveen Prakesh lot owner
• Saliya Gunawardena lot owner
• Petar Trajkovsji lot owner
• Sandor Jakucs lot owner
• Peter Clisdell Pty Ltd trading as Clisdells Strata Management manager
• Strata Management Centre Pty Limited trading as Strata Management Services NSW manager

The appeal against the compulsory strata manager appointment of Clisdells was dismissed; leave to appeal was granted on grounds 1-3 relating to procedural fairness but refused on grounds 4-5, and the original appointment order was upheld.

MANAGEMENT OF COMMON PROPERTY – whether body corporate is failing to manage common property visitor carpark reasonably and for the benefit of lot owners – whether committee members are breaching code of conduct. Act, ss 94(2), 100(5), 152

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

BY-LAW – whether a principal scheme by-law about the revetment wall is valid – GENERAL MEETING MOTION – where a motion to amend the by-law was defeated – whether the motion should be deemed passed. Act, ss 11, 11, 20, 44, 45, 58, 59, 62, 94, 169, 180; Standard Module, ss 180, 188, 189, 210, 211

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.

NOISE – where owner alleges noise from upstairs lot is affecting her peaceful enjoyment – whether the preliminary procedure for by-law enforcement has been complied with – whether there has been a breach of by-laws – whether the noise constitutes nuisance – whether the owner is required to install acoustic underlay. Act, s185

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

NOISE BY-LAW IN A DUPLEX – whether the respondent is in breach of the scheme’s noise by-law – whether the respondent should contribute 50% of the costs sought by the applicant to soundproof the wall dividing the two lots Act, ss 59, 94, 182, 183, 185, 270, 276, 280

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

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDERS – whether body corporate is authorised to remove a billboard on common property in an exclusive use area allocated to a lot by ordinary resolution – whether removal of the billboard requires a resolution without dissent – whether extraordinary general meeting was validly called and notice properly given – whether the body corporate acted reasonably in deciding to remove billboard – whether body corporate should be prevented from removing the billboard pending final orders. Act, ss 94, 100(5); Accommodation Module, ss 174, 183

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

EMERGENCY EXPENDITURE – whether the circumstances give rise to a genuine emergency. Act, s 243A; Accommodation Module, s 162(1)(c)

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

IMPROVEMENT TO OWNER’S LOT – where a structure has been installed on an owner’s lot – whether body corporate approval was required – whether the structure is visible from common property – whether there has been a breach of by-laws – whether the structure should be removed. Act, s94

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

MAINTENANCE – in building format plan – whether body corporate has failed to meet their obligations, whether body corporate is responsible for repairs to a lot – whether another lot owner has failed to meet their obligations, whether another lot owner is responsible for repairs to a lot APPOINTMENT OF ADMINISTRATOR Act ss 152, 227, 228, 276, 281; 301 Standard Module, s 159. Seiwa Pty Ltd v The Owners Strata Plan 35042 [[2006] NSWSC 1157](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2006/1157.html "View Case") MAGOG Pty Ltd v Body Corporate for the Moroccan [[2010] QDC 70](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QDC/2010/70.html "View Case")

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

IMPROVEMENT TO EXCLUSIVE USE AREA – where a lot owner installed a structure within an exclusive use area of common property – whether approval was required – whether approval was obtained - whether there was a contravention of by-laws - whether the body corporate acted unreasonably – whether the improvements should be removed. Act, s94(2); Standard Module, s193

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

Application by strata company for enforcement of scheme conduct by-laws where no written notice given - Whether contravention has had serious adverse consequences - Whether particular scheme conduct by­law contravened on at least three separate occasions - Onus of proof - Whether first respondent is an occupier of a lot in the strata scheme - Whether application should be dismissed - Failure of witnesses to attend hearing - Discretion of Tribunal to make orders - Turns on own facts

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

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 7704 owners corp
• Jiwoo Kim lot owner

The Tribunal ordered the respondent to ensure that the floor space in lot 3 in the two bedrooms, hallways, living and dining room is soundproofed to prevent transmission of noise in excess of 50 LnT,w within 56 days, finding the installed flooring system did not comply with the approved 5 star acoustic rating condition.

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. 86807 owners corp
• Crown Group Constructions Pty Ltd builder
• Crown W Pty Ltd developer

Leave was granted to the Owners Corporation to amend its technology and construction list statement to add a claim under the Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 for breach of duty of care regarding non-compliant cladding, conditional upon filing expert evidence by 15 June 2023 that the cladding did not comply with the Building Code of Australia.

INTERIM ORDER – whether to grant an interim order. Act, s 269

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, s 283

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

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDERS – whether the body corporate should be prevented from implementing a resolution to commence legal proceedings because it may have breached its fiduciary duty by failing to advise owners of the likely costs and prospects. Act, ss 279(1), 312.

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

IMPROVEMENTS IN A DUPLEX – where the previous owner of Lot 1 built a fence enclosing an area of common property in front of Lot 1 – where the current owner of Lot 2 alleges the fence was not authorised and wants it removed – whether the fence should be removed Act, ss 35, 62, 94, 154, 170; Standard Module, ss 180, 184, 187

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

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. Standard Module, s 235

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

Unauthorised use of/improvement to common property Act, ss 35, 59(2),152(1)(a); Commercial Module, ss 131, 134(1)

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

REIMBURSEMENT FOR REPAIRS – where the applicant alleges a leak in the common property roof caused damage to her lot – where she arranged for the roof and the ceilings and cornices of her lot to be repaired and sought reimbursement for the cost of the repairs – whether the body corporate should reimburse the applicant for the amounts incurred Act, ss 152, 227; Standard Module, s 180

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.

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.

BY-LAWS – whether lot owner needed body corporate authorisation to install water pipes on common property – whether committee for body corporate acted reasonably when imposing conditions on approval – whether orders sought by the body corporate are warranted in the circumstances. Act, ss 94(2), 100(5); Standard Module, s 187

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

GENERAL MEETING PROCEDURES – where the body corporate passed a resolution to engage a contractor to undertake maintenance and painting works – whether the meeting and motion were valid. Act, ss 94, 106, 163; Standard Module, ss 85, 90, 114, 180, 187, 187, 192, 210, 212

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

AGM RESOLUTION; IMPROVEMENT TO COMMON PROPERTY – whether the body corporate acted unreasonably when resolving to install a roof access hatch on common property just outside the applicant’s lot. Act, ss 94(2), 163.

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

FIRST ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING – whether a first annual general meeting will be void because it will be held late. Standard Module, s 94.

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

• Mei Lan Roberts lot owner
• The Owners - Strata Plan No 4393 owners corp

The Appeal Panel dismissed the appellant's appeal and upheld the Tribunal's decision awarding costs to the respondent owners corporation, finding the appellant had engaged in wilful misconduct by conducting unauthorised renovation works in breach of stop-work orders and Tribunal directions.

Building and Property

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

BODY CORPORATE – whether the body corporate contravened its statutory maintenance duty, whether the applicant suffered damage to property because of a contravention of the Act. ONUS OF PROOF – STANDARD OF PROOF – EVIDENCE – where no direct evidence of fault or omission by the body corporate – whether evidence sufficient to satisfy adjudicator of body corporate liability\_‑\_ Act, ss 94, 152, 281

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 end date Act, s283

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

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDER – where the body corporate has passed resolutions to increase the scheme’s levies and to raise special levies – whether there are urgent circumstances to warrant granting an interim order to immediately halt the requirement for all owners to make payment of all levies Act, ss 94, 106, 110, 279

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

• Promina Design & Construction Pty Ltd builder
• The Owners – Strata Plan No. 97449 owners corp

The application for a stay of the order transferring proceedings to the District Court was dismissed on the basis that the Appeal Panel had no meaningful power to stay an order that took effect when made.

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.

IMPROVEMENT TO COMMON PROPERTY – where an owner installed a fence and gate to common property – whether body corporate approval is required - whether the improvements are reasonably necessary for health, safety or security of persons using the common property Act, s 94; Specified Two-lot Schemes Module, ss 5, 35, 36

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