Decisions table

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.

Motion to enter into new caretaking service contract – whether ruled out of order incorrectly; whether resolved; whether interim order should be granted to prevent entry into alternative caretaking service contract in the interim. Act, s 279; Accommodation Module, ss 88, 163

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

AGM RESOLUTIONS – whether several motions proposing expenditure on the engagement of various parties to perform work were invalid because they did not pass by special resoluton and did not offer members at least two tenders for the work. Act, ss 138, 151(1)(a), 158A, 163.

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

• Owners Corporation PS623721 owners corp
• Shangri-La Construction Pty Ltd (in liquidation) builder

The builder was ordered to pay the owners corporation 746,000 dollars in defect damages, with further awards to other lot-owner applicants.

Building and Property; Insurance

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. Act, s 94(2)

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.

CONTRIBUTION SCHEDULE LOT ENTITLEMENTS WHETHER CONTRIBUTION SCHEDULE LOT ENTITLEMENTS WERE ABLE TO BE ADJUSTED BY RESOLUTION WITHOUT DISSENT IN 2007

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

CONTRIBUTION SCHEDULE LOT ENTITLEMENTS WHETHER CONTRIBUTION SCHEDULE LOT ENTITLEMENTS WERE ABLE TO BE ADJUSTED BY RESOLUTION WITHOUT DISSENT IN 2007

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

• Maurice Clifford Westerweller lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 18482 owners corp

The appeal against the Primary Decision was dismissed due to failure to file within time and no extension of time granted; the appeal against the Costs Decision was dismissed as leave to appeal was refused.

IMPROVEMENT TO LOT – where the respondents wish to remove two internal kitchen walls from their lot, a by-law requires body corporate approval for structural alterations, and the body corporate has not approved the alteration; whether the respondents should be prevented from removing the walls until a determination is made as to whether body corporate approval is required because the walls are loadbearing. Act, s 279(1).

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

BY-LAW ENFORCEMENT – whether respondent lot owner breached by-laws by failing to get written approval to install an outdoor blind – whether body corporate acted reasonably in requiring removal of the unauthorised outdoor blind where blind does not meet certain colour specifications. Act, ss 94(2), 100(5)

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

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDER – where motions relating to significant repairs to be undertaken at the scheme were considered at a recent extraordinary general meeting and passed – where the applicant was unable to vote on the motions and wants the resolutions set aside – whether there are urgent circumstances to warrant granting an interim order in this case Act, ss 152, 279; Standard Module, ss 162, 173, 180

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.

BODY CORPORATE RECORDS – whether a lot owner has been, or should be, provided with copies of body corporate records as requested. Act, s 205; Standard Module, s 232.

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

GENERAL MEETING MOTIONS – where the body corporate purported to pass general meeting motions, particularly to record new by-laws – where a new community management statement was recorded including amended by-laws – whether the motions are valid – whether the new by-laws are valid. Act, ss 94, 100, 169, 180

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

ACOUSTICS BY-LAW – whether a by-law restricting hard flooring from being installed directly above a bedroom or requiring an LnTw of 52 or less is discriminatory, oppressive or unreasonable in breach of the Act RESONABLENESS – whether the committee’s decision to reject the hard flooring application was unreasonable Act, ss 62, 94, 169, 180

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

FINANCIAL YEAR – whether the financial year end date for the body corporate should be changed. Act, s 283

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

FINANCIAL YEAR – whether the financial year end date for the body corporate should be changed. Act, s 283

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

• Charles Cuthbert contractor
• The Owners - Strata Plan No. 34194 owners corp

The appeal was dismissed and leave to appeal was refused; the Owners' entitlement to recover $23,866.50 from the Contractor for rectification and completion of defective painting works was upheld.

• Parkview Constructions Pty Ltd builder
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 90018 owners corp
• The Quay Haymarket Pty Ltd developer

The appeal by the builder and developer against the primary judge's decision to allow the owners corporation to amend its statement to include three new alleged defects was dismissed, with the court holding that claims for breach of statutory warranties constitute a single cause of action for breach of contract rather than separate causes of action for each defect.

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.

Validity of committee resolutions, where application not made within 3 months of some committee resolutions being made – whether there is good reason to waive non-compliance with section 242; whether an invoiced amount constitutes a body corporate debt; whether there is jurisdiction to determine whether the amount can be invoiced to an owner; whether the invoiced amount should be removed from the accounts. Act, ss 150,162, 228(1)(b), 242, 274(1), 276; Accommodation Module, ss 37(2), 49(3)(a), 63(1)(a), 153(2), 156(1).

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