Recent heavy rainfall in Sydney has led to an increase in compensation claims by lot owners against owners corporations due to water leakage and consequential damage.

Often, those claims are for loss of rent.

These types of claims are usually difficult for an owners corporation to defend because it has a strict duty to properly maintain and keep in good repair the common property.

However, in a recent case, the Supreme Court rejected a compensation claim by an owner for loss of rent, providing a glimmer of hope for owners corporations.

Here we share the case and outcome Supreme Court Rejects Owners Claims for Damages

Contact Us

For all strata law advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact our specialist NSW and Sydney strata lawyers here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.

A recent hot topic has been the width of the powers given to NCAT to resolve strata disputes.

In particular, can NCAT resolve any strata dispute or just some disputes?

This interesting issue was considered in a recent decision of the Appeal Panel of NCAT.

The Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 gives NCAT power to make orders to settle complaints or disputes about the operation, administration or management of strata schemes or the exercise of functions of an owners corporation.  But the width of that power is not entirely clear.

For example, does the power allow NCAT to make an order to resolve any strata dispute?

Here we share a recent case outcome Can NCAT Resolve Any Strata Dispute or Just Some Disputes?

Contact Us

For all strata law advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact our specialist NSW and Sydney strata lawyers here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.

What type of resolution must an owners corporation pass in order to authorise a change to common property?

The strata legislation allows an owners corporation to replace common property with the authority of an ordinary resolution.

But the legislation also says that an owners corporation cannot upgrade common property unless it first passes a special resolution.

Where is the line drawn between replacing and improving common property?

In this article we take a closer look at this much vexed issue: Changing Common Property_ An Ordinary or Special Resolution?

Contact Us

For all strata law advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact our specialist NSW and Sydney strata lawyers here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.

Who Pays the Compensation?

When an owners corporation is ordered to compensate an owner, who pays that compensation?  The owners corporation, right?  A recent decision by NCAT’s Appeal Panel produced a surprising answer to that question.

Introduction

An owners corporation has a statutory duty to properly maintain and keep in good repair the common property.  This duty arises under section 106 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015.  If an owners corporation does not repair defects in the common property, it will breach that duty.  Where that occurs, a lot owner who suffers monetary loss arising from that breach is able to sue the owners corporation to recover that loss.

Previous Cases

There have been a number of cases where both NCAT and the Supreme Court have ordered owners corporations to pay compensation to owners to cover their losses arising from failures to repair defects in common property that typically allow water to leak into and cause damage to lots. In those cases, owners have been awarded compensation for rental loss, alternate accommodation expenses, cleaning costs, repair costs, experts’ fees and legal costs.  But when an owners corporation is ordered to compensate an owner for those losses, who ends up paying that compensation? The answer to that question should be straightforward, right? Not so.

NCAT Case

On 30 November 2021, NCAT’s Appeal Panel handed down its decision in SP 74698 v Jacinta Investments Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATAP 387.  In that case, an owner had sued an owners corporation for (among other things) compensation to cover the owner’s losses that arose from an owners corporation’s breach of its duty to repair common property.  The owner was successful and was awarded over $250,000.00 in compensation.  NCAT also ordered that the compensation be paid through a contribution that was levied on all owners except the successful owner who won the case.  The owners corporation appealed against that aspect of NCAT’s decision (and others). NCAT’s Appeal Panel upheld the decision.  The Appeal Panel concluded that it would be unjust for the successful owner to have to contribute towards the payment of the compensation the owners corporation had been ordered to pay the owner.  This meant that the owners corporation was required to levy a contribution on all owners (apart from the successful owner) to raise the funds needed to pay the compensation it was ordered to pay.  The owners corporation was also ordered to pay the owner’s costs of the case and those costs were determined to be payable through a contribution to be levied on all of the other owners.

The Wash Up

The Jacinta Investments case provides an example of one of the rare circumstances in which an owners corporation is able impose a differential levy on some but not all owners.  The case also highlights that individual owners can be made liable to pay compensation that an owners corporation is ordered to pay to another owner to cover any damage or loss the owner suffers where the owners corporation does not fulfill its responsibility to repair common property.

The Future

The Jacinta Investments case has broader implications.  It opens the door for owners to argue in legal proceedings in NCAT that they should not be required to contribute to the payment of costs an owners corporation will incur repairing common property or consequential damage to lot property.  So, for example, where an owner sues an owners corporation in NCAT for an order to force the owners corporation to repair common property defects and water damage to the owner’s lot caused by those defects, the owner may now be able to obtain an order from NCAT excusing the owner from having to contribute to a levy that is raised to pay for those repairs.  Stay tuned because there is likely to be another chapter to this story.

Author I Adrian Mueller, Partner I B.Com LLB FACCAL.

Contact Us

For all strata law advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact our specialist NSW and Sydney strata lawyers here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.

Follow Us

Linkedin


Twitter


Envelope

Relevant for Any Owners Corporation with Combustible Cladding on Their Building.

On 18 October 2021, the NSW Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of Taylor Construction Group Pty Ltd v The Owners – Strata Plan No. 92888 [2021] NSWSC 1315, confirming that biowood cladding is combustible cladding that poses a risk of fire spread between levels on the façade of an apartment building. Muellers represented the successful owners corporation in NCAT and also in the Supreme Court – a WIN for all owners corporations.

Senior Lawyer, Faiyaaz Shafiq, JS Mueller & Co Lawyers, said, “The outcome of the case represents a major win for owners corporations strengthening the basis for claims by owners corporations against builders and developers who have installed combustible cladding on their buildings.”

“I have no doubt it will see a marked shift in the way in which builders and developers respond to combustible cladding claims”, said Faiyaaz.

The owners corporation initially commenced proceedings in NCAT against the builder and developer seeking orders that biowood cladding installed on the façade of its building be replaced or compensation be paid to cover the cost to replace the cladding.

The owners corporation claimed that the cladding was combustible or created an undue risk of fire spread in breach of the statutory warranties under the Home Building Act 1989 because it did not comply with the Building Code of Australia and was not fit for its purpose.

NCAT ordered that the defective biowood cladding be rectified by the builder and developer. The builder/developer appealed NCAT’s findings to NCAT’s Appeal Panel which dismissed the appeal.

The builder/developer then appealed to the NSW Supreme Court.

The NSW Supreme Court on 18 October 2021 gave a comprehensive judgment dismissing the appeal. In doing so, the Court accepted the owners corporation’s arguments that:

1. biowood cladding is combustible;
2. there is a risk that fire will spread beyond the floor of origin because the material from which the biowood is made will support fire spread between the levels of the building;
3. there was evidence from the fire safety engineer of the owners corporation that there is an undue risk of fire spreading due to the biowood;
4. there was no evidence to support the contention of the builder/developer that a slower rate of fire spread does not present an undue risk in comparison with a higher rate of spread; and
5. there was evidence that sprinklers or any other fire safety measure would have no relevance to external fire spread.

Furthermore, the Court also agreed with the owners corporation’s submission that combustible cladding is not fit for purpose which is one of the categories of the statutory warranties under the Home Building Act 1989.

The Court has reaffirmed the view that the fundamental fire safety requirement for a class 2 apartment building requires external walls to be non-combustible, and cladding installed in a multi-storey apartment building which does not comply with the BCA is not suitable for the purpose for which it is used.

The Court’s judgment confirms the view the owners corporation always held that biowood poses an unacceptable fire safety risk.

The Court’s judgment is a landmark ruling that is relevant to any owners corporation that has combustible cladding on its building.

The ruling strengthens the basis for claims by owners corporations against builders and developers who have installed combustible cladding on their buildings and should see a marked shift in the way in which builder and developers respond to those claims.

Note: Faiyaaz Shafiq of JS Mueller & Co Lawyers acted for the successful owners corporation and was assisted by barristers Tom Davie and Anita Power of Queen’s Square Chambers.

If you or your owners corporation require advice about combustible cladding, please contact our expert team now.

For all NSW strata legal advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact us here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.

In last week’s newsletter article, we reported on a recent NCAT case in which an owners corporation was ordered to repair damage to lot property caused by a common property roof leak.

Our article generated considerable interest. The NCAT decision begs the question: Is an owners corporation responsible for repairing lot property?

In this article, we take a closer look at that issue and consider whether the NCAT case we reported on last week (Mastellone v The Owners – Strata Plan No. 87110 [2021] NSWCATAP 188) was correctly decided.

Read the full article Is an Owners Corporation Responsible for Repairing Lot Property?

For all NSW strata legal advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact us here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.

In a recent case NCAT has penalized an owners corporation $6,600 for breaching an order to repair common property defects.

However, due to a quirk in the strata legislation, before NCAT could impose that penalty, the lot owners who sough the penalty had to obtain the consent of the NSW Attorney General to make the penalty application.

The case highlights the importance of new laws in the Strata Schemes Management Amendment (Sustainability Infrastructure) Bill 2021 that are expected to commence later this year that will give NCAT power to issue penalties of up to $5,500.00 (without the consent of the NSW Attorney General) for breaching orders made by NCAT.

Read on…NCAT dishes our punishment for order breaches

For all NSW strata legal including by-laws, building defect and levy collection advice contact us here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.

In a surprising decision, the Supreme Court has recently held that lot owners are able to start legal action in NCAT to force an owners corporation to grant them a licence to use common property before the owners corporation has rejected their proposal for a licence.

This decision will alter the strategy of some owners who want to obtain special rights over areas of common property and may result in the commencement of litigation to gain leverage over an owners corporation.

Ultimately this case gives NCAT a mandate to attempt to resolve strata disputes in a more flexible way.

Read the full case here Supreme Court, NCAT and A Load of Rubbish

For NSW strata legal, by-law, building defect and levy collection advice contact us here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.

COVID-19 Risk in Apartment Buildings

 
 Read on for more details or to purchase your by-law click the button below. 

There has been recent talk in the media about the risk of apartment buildings becoming hot spots for Coronavirus infection.

This media attention has focussed on the fact that the recent public health orders and other laws that have been introduced to help stop the spread of Coronavirus do not apply to densely populated apartment buildings.

Apartment Buildings – Are they Cruise Ships on Land?

Indeed, there has been mention of apartment buildings turning into “cruise ships on land” unless stringent rules are put in place to regulate them to help stop the spread of Coronavirus inside them.

For that reason, there is a need for some residential strata buildings to introduce rules to help stop the spread of Coronavirus.  We have drafted a by-law that sets out those rules.  The by-law addresses:

• reporting COVID-19 infections;
• self-isolation;
• social distancing;
• parties and social gatherings;
• guests and visitors;
• changes in occupancy such as short term stay guests via Airbnb;
• use of recreational facilities;
• restrictions on access to and use of areas of common property;
• landlords’ responsibility for tenants;
• responsibility for invitees.

COVID-19 By-law – Power to Help Avoid the Spread

The by-law will prove useful for many residential strata buildings to set out basic rules that owners and tenants must follow to help avoid the spread of Coronavirus and to give owners corporations power to take steps to prevent the transmission of COVID-19 in their buildings.

In the expectation that the COVID-19 pandemic will pass, our by-law provides for the owners corporation to conduct a mandatory review of the by-law and its terms within six months to enable the by-law to be amended or be repealed at the appropriate time and for the by-law to expire at the conclusion of the COVID-19 pandemic.

A One-off COVID-19 By-law for all Your Buildings

We are offering the by-law to strata managers working in the strata management industry for a discounted price of $300.00 plus GST.  For that fee, you obtain a licence to use the by-law and introduce the by-law into as many residential buildings as you like. If you have residential buildings that may benefit from the by-law, please do not hesitate to contact us.

CLICK HERE TO PURCHASE YOUR COVID-19 BY-LAW

For NSW strata legal, building defect or levy collection advice please contact us here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.

In a recent NSW Supreme Court case the builder brought an application to the Court seeking an order that the owners corporation provide security for costs to protect the costs of the builder in the litigation in the event the builder was successful and unable to recover his costs from the owners corporation.

So, did the court grant with the builder’s application? Owners Corporation Litigation Security for Costs

For NSW strata legal or levy collection advice contact us here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.