Lot Owner Claims Damages of $850 Million!

Generally we use these  bulletins for educational purposes,  but it’s getting toward that time of the year when everything goes a little crazy in the world of strata title, and so today the emphasis is on providing you with sheer relief that your strata scheme is not tied up with the sort of case in which a decision was recently made by the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where a lot owner commenced proceedings against the owners corporation claiming damages of $850 million!

The Strata Dispute Lot Owner Vs Owners Corporation

The dispute, between the occupant of an apartment located in Sydney and the owners corporation,  began life as a tenancy dispute, but the occupant (tenant), having failed to enlist the support of the NSW Civil & Administrative Tribunal (NCAT),  brought proceedings in the Supreme Court of NSW seeking among other things damages of $850 million against the owners corporation! You can imagine the insurer’s claims manager when that came through…

Needless to say, the proceedings in the Supreme Court of NSW were, to use the words of the Supreme Court Judge dealing with the final version of the proceedings, “frivolous and vexatious” and an abuse of the process of the Court.  Notwithstanding this, the plaintiff lot occupant filed applications of various kinds in the proceedings, made scandalous allegations against the owners corporation’s legal representatives, court officials and even a judge of the Court.

At the heart of the lot occupant’s claim was the suggestion that the owners corporation had somehow been involved in a criminal conspiracy which allegedly caused the plaintiff loss and damage.

Finally, on the sixth application before the Court (some of those applications being interlocutory applications for stays, injunctions and applications for recusal of various judges) the entire application was dismissed and the lot occupant was ordered to pay the owners corporation’s legal costs on an indemnity basis.  This means that the owners corporation was entitled to recover from the lot occupant not only the normal (“party/party”) costs but almost all the legal costs it had expended in having to deal with this application.

Conclusion

So as we head towards the end of the year, and if you are experiencing stress due to the matters which your owners corporation has to deal with, just remember – at least you haven’t been served with a law suit for $850 million!

If you do have issues in your strata scheme JS Mueller & Co Strata Lawyers have the experience and ability to assist you in dealing with these issues, whether they are disputes relating to the operation of the committee, questions about property and renovations, dealing with adjoining land owners and more please contact us on the details below for further assistance.

/*! elementor - v3.17.0 - 08-11-2023 */
.elementor-widget-image{text-align:center}.elementor-widget-image a{display:inline-block}.elementor-widget-image a img[src$=".svg"]{width:48px}.elementor-widget-image img{vertical-align:middle;display:inline-block}

Warwick van Ede I BEc LLM I Lawyer

Since 1990, Warwick has specialised in strata law, property law and litigation. Recognised for his expertise, he is also a NSW Law Society Accredited Specialist in Property Law. In 2021 he was selected to serve on the Property Law Committee of the Law Society  of NSW.  Profile I LinkedIn

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.

Are Visitor Parking Spaces Exempt from Levies?

A recent decision of the Appeal Panel of NCAT has re-examined the question of as to whether visitor parking spaces in a residential strata complex qualify for exemption from levies which may be payable pursuant to the Parking Space Levy Act 2009 (NSW).

NSW Government Introduces the Parking Space Levy Act

An attempt to discourage or reduce traffic congestion in certain key Sydney business districts, in 2009  the NSW Government introduced the Parking Space Levy Act , the effect of which was to make a levy payable by landowners  on certain off-street parking spaces located in specified districts.

In broad terms, the districts to which the legislation currently applies are:

• Sydney CBD;
• North Sydney/Milsons Point;
• Bondi Junction;
• Chatswood;
• Parramatta; and
• St Leonards.

There are designated maps which set out in detail the parts of those areas to which the levy applies, and the levy has two categories. Category 1 (Sydney CBD and North Sydney/Milsons Point) has the highest levy rate, and  the balance of districts are designated as Category 2, for which a lower rate is payable.

The relevant legislation also contains exemptions, one of which is set out in Regulations 7 & 8 of the Parking Space Levy Regulation 2009 (the Regulation). One of the exempt purposes is where the parking spaces are for “the parking of motor vehicles by persons who reside on the premises or an adjoining premises”.

NCAT Disputes Visitor Car Space Assessment

The premises in question in this case were located in Milsons Point, and were therefore designated as “Category 1”. The Chief Commissioner of State Revenue made a determination that the strata scheme in Milsons Point was liable to pay a car space levy on 5 of 7 car spaces which were set aside for visitors to the property. The strata scheme itself is a mixed commercial and residential building containing 33 residential apartments and 7 commercial suites.

An application was made by the strata scheme to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) disputing the assessment made by the Chief Commissioner of State Revenue on the basis that the visitor car spaces in question should have been considered as “exempt” parking spaces.

Specifically, the strata scheme’s original application to NCAT argued that the exemptions described in Regulations 7 and 8 of the Regulations for “the parking of motor vehicles by persons who reside on the premises or an adjoining premises” should include parking spaces set aside for visitors of persons who reside on the premises.

The original decision of NCAT was that visitor car spaces were not exempt. The owners corporation then appealed the original NCAT decision in relation to this issue to the Appeal Panel.

The Decision of the Appeal Panel

The Appeal Panel rejected the proposition that parking for guests of residents was intended to be covered by the relevant exemption.

The Appeal Panel noted that Regulations 7 and 8 contained a number of specific exemptions including for parking of contractors and consultants providing services on the premises. The Appeal Panel argued that  if the Parliament had intended for an exemption to be granted for the parking of “guests”, then it could have included that exemption explicitly within those Regulations, which it did not.

The Appeal Panel noted that limiting the exemption in this way was also consistent with the aims of the legislation, being to discourage car use in the area. The Appeal Panel found that the parking spaces in question were for a combination of exempt and non-exempt purposes, and therefore not “exclusively” set aside for an exempt purpose.

The Appeal Panel therefore upheld the original decision of NCAT, and the original decision of the Chief Commissioner of State Revenue to apply the levy to these car spaces was affirmed.

The Conclusion

Although the Act and the Regulations apply only to a limited set of areas within Sydney, it is within the power of the Government to expand the list of areas to which that levy will apply in the future.  In light of current public policy settings regarding driving and motor vehicle use generally, the exercise of that power to expand the list of leviable areas in Sydney must be considered a possibility.

Owners Corporations within Category 1 and Category 2 areas should be aware of their obligations under the Act and the Regulations,  and the applicability of those legislative instruments to their particular circumstances.

Need Help with a Parking Issue?

We are happy to provide guidance to strata schemes who seek interpretation of the application of any Ruling in relation to levies of this kind or simply require general parking advice in relation to the issue.

Warwick van Ede I BEc LLM I Lawyer

Since 1990, Warwick has specialised in strata law, property law and litigation. Recognised for his expertise, he is also a NSW Law Society Accredited Specialist in Property Law. In 2021 he was selected to serve on the Property Law Committee of the Law Society of NSW. Profile I LinkedIn

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.

Strata be Warned of Telecommunications Providers

Earlier this year we wrote about an increasing rise of telecommunications providers who are licensed under the relevant Commonwealth telecommunications legislation, using their powers to gain compulsory access (at no cost to them!) to owners corporation’s buildings.  In that article (Pushy Telco’s and Owners Corporations) we drew to the attention of owners corporations that such telecommunications providers use the processes set out in the Telecommunications Act and the Telecommunications Code of Practice and in particular, the use of a Notice to Inspect and a Notice to Install.  We pointed out in that article that if an owners corporation does not respond within very precise timeframes to these Notices, then the owners corporation loses its ability to object to the proposals set out in those Notices,  and they lose their ability to require the relevant telecommunications provider to consider any alternatives.

Ongoing Developments Since Our Original Article

Since the time of our original article, it has been clear that the activities of these telecommunications providers (which go by various names,  including GigaComm, and Servicestream) has continued, with more and more Notices to Inspect and Notices to Install coming to our attention.

Owners Corporations Act or Lose your Rights

Telecommunications service providers have written to us unhappy that they are being challenged,  and they have suggested that they are only utilising the rights which they have under the telecommunications legislation.  What they fail to comprehend is that landowners (such as owners corporations) also have rights to object to the proposals by telecommunications service providers, and certain rights  to require telecommunications service providers to properly justify these proposals.

To be clear, if an owners corporation wishes to question a proposal which they receive from a telecommunications service provider, then it is essential and critical that the owners corporation acts in a timely and immediate fashion to ensure that a properly draft Notice of Objection is served on the telecommunications service provider, or the owners corporation may be stuck with whatever proposal the telecommunications service provider wishes to proceed with.

Unsure What to do…

If your owners corporation requires assistance with a proposal from a telecommunications service provider, we are experienced in the processes under the telecommunications legislation including in drafting Notices of Objection in compliance with that legislation.

Warwick van Ede I BEc LLM I Lawyer

Since 1990, Warwick has specialised in strata law, property law and litigation. Recognised for his expertise, he is also a NSW Law Society Accredited Specialist in Property Law. In 2021 he was selected to serve on the Property Law Committee of the Law Society of NSW. Profile I LinkedIn

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.

Owners corporations are increasingly encountering aggressive behaviour by some telecommunications providers who say they are acting under powers granted to them pursuant to the Telecommunications Act.

Preserving the owners corporation’s rights and negotiating position can come down to whether the owners corporation responds in a timely fashion, and in accordance with the relevant legislation.

Failure to do these things may mean the owners corporation is stuck with a proposal to install infrastructure and technology which the owners do not want.

It is important that you understand the steps which your owners corporation needs to take in dealing with such telecommunications providers.

The Rise of “Low Impact” Telecommunications Infrastructure

Once upon a time, the only occasion on which an owners corporation would hear from a telecommunications provider was if that telecommunications provider wished to install a mobile telephone tower on top of the building comprising the strata scheme.

In most instances this would lead to negotiations between the owners corporation and the relevant telecommunications provider as to the nature of the leasing arrangement which would be put in place to enable that mobile telephone tower to be erected and maintained and almost always the owners corporation would receive rental income as a result of allowing such installation to take place.

Under the Telecommunications Code of Practice 2021, telecommunications providers can give notices to an owners corporation in relation to their intention to use owners corporation’s property for various purposes.  Typically, these notices include:

• The Inspection Notice – this notice provides the owners corporation with notice of the telecommunications provider’s intention to enter the strata scheme carry out an inspection of the building or buildings comprising the strata scheme to enable the telecommunications provider to consider whether it wishes to proceed with any further proposals; and/or
• The Installation Notice – typically, a notice of this kind provides the owners corporation with written notice of the telecommunication provider’s intention to install certain “low impact” telecommunications infrastructure and systems – the notion of what is “low impact” is defined by the relevant legislation.

The Importance of Responding

The relevant legislation requires that an owners corporation receiving a notice from a telecommunications provider under the relevant legislation must respond:

• in writing;
• within a certain limited timeframe; and
• in a specified manner,

otherwise the telecommunications provider may automatically have rights to do certain things pursuant to the relevant legislation.  For example, if the owners corporation fails to properly respond and/or fails to respond within the timeframes governed by the legislation, then the owners corporation may find itself without any basis to argue against a telecommunications provider installing certain equipment and infrastructure on the building, including certain forms of antennas, cabling etc.

“Pushing Back” Against Telecommunications Providers

Over the last 12 months we have seen a rise in the instances of such proposals, and specifically, of inspection notices or installation notices being given to owners corporations.

Normally the manner in which an owners corporation can respond is extremely limited, as is the time in which an owners corporation can respond.

Interestingly, when we have been engaged to object to those notices (in accordance with the relevant parts of the telecommunications legislation) then the telecommunications providers have, almost in every instance, withdrawn their notices and decided not to further engage with that particular owners corporation.

Therefore , even if the situation appears to have been “lost”, where  the owners corporation has failed to take any steps to deal with an inspection notice or installation notice, it is still worth engaging legal advisors to formally object to those notices, as it appears that telecommunications providers may not be willing to take on a “hostile” owners corporation, properly engaged.

Timing is Everything!

Should your owners corporation receive a notice from a telecommunications provider, then it is critical that you seek advice promptly, as some of the timeframes in which the owners corporation is entitled to respond are only 10 days in length.

Under the relevant legislation, any objection must deal with certain specified matters.

Need assistance with a proposal from a telecommunications service provider, we are experienced in the processes under the telecommunications legislation including drafting ‘Notices of Objection’ in compliance with that legislation. CLICK HERE!

Warwick van Ede I BEc LLM I Lawyer

Since 1990, Warwick has specialised in strata law, property law and litigation. Recognised for his expertise, he is also a NSW Law Society Accredited Specialist in Property Law. In 2021 he was selected to serve on the Property Law Committee of the Law Society of NSW. Profile I LinkedIn

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.

Can a lot owner now make claims against building and strata managers for negligence?

A recent decision of the Appeal Panel of NCAT has not ruled out the possibility that NCAT may be able to award damages to a lot owner for negligence by a strata manager and/or building manager of a strata scheme.

What did the Appeal Panel find, based upon previous decisions considering the Tribunal’s powers?

Here we share the case: Damages Claims Against Strata Managers and Building Managers – NCAT Opens the Door

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.

NCAT Issues a Warning for Building Managers

 

A recent decision of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) has broken new ground in making orders for the termination of a Building Manager Agreement.

In particular, the finding in this case was that the caretaker (building manager) had failed to perform the relevant agreement satisfactorily, and that the building manager agreement, in the circumstances of the case, was harsh, oppressive, unreasonable or unconscionable.

Owners Corporations and Unsatisfactory Building Managers

This decision of NCAT provides a comprehensive analysis of the operation of s72 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 and provides a solid framework for an Owners Corporation to consider whether there are grounds to seek the assistance of NCAT to bring an unfair or unsatisfactory Caretaker (Building Manager) Agreement to an end.

Here we share the recent case and outcomes: NCAT Issues a Warning for Misbehaving Building Managers.

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.

Smokers Unknowingly Breaching By-laws

A recent decision of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) has recognised that even though a lot owner smokes inside their lot, they still may be in breach of the by-laws of the owners corporation and  leave themselves open to a penalty being imposed by NCAT.

Why? Because if the smoke leaves their apartment it will almost inevitably penetrate Common Property in one way or another.

A Recent Case…

This recent case illustrates that it is extraordinarily difficult for smokers to avoid breaching by-laws and why it’s important to have a well-drafted by-law if the owners corporation wishes to comprehensively deal with the issue.

Here we share the recent NCAT case article Smoking in Strata Apartments another “nail in the coffin”!

Also below, Warwick van Ede, Specialist Strata Lawyer talks with LookUpStrata on this very case and the many unanswered questions!

It’s definitely time to review your smoking by-law, or to implement one if you do not have one!

NEED A SMOKING BY-LAW OR TO REVIEW YOURS?

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

A recent decision of the Appeal Panel of the NSW Civil & Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) has highlighted the potential risks for owners corporations seeking to impose penalties and other sanctions on lot owners in connection with non-compliance with by-laws.

Careful attention will need to be paid by owners corporations to “cost recovery” aspects of their by-laws to ensure that an otherwise well constructed by-law is not rendered completely invalid.

Here we share a recent case where NCAT Tightens the Screws on Strata By-laws.

Owners corporations who have these by-laws should give consideration to having them reviewed.

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.

Earlier this year Warwick van Ede, specialist strata lawyer and member of the Property Law Committee of the Law Society of NSW invited you to participate in the process of review of the current strata legislation in NSW as part of the statutory review process.

Over 2,300 online survey responses were received and over 200 submissions filed through the NSW Government’s website in relation to the statutory review.

The report on the outcome of the statutory review was finally tabled in the NSW Parliament on Monday 29 November 2021.  In total 37 recommendations were made in relation to proposed amendments to the Strata Schemes Development Act 2015, and 102 recommendations were made in relation to the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015.

The key recommendations of the Strata Schemes Development Act and Strata Schemes Management Act can be found here  2021 Strata Review Tabled in NSW Parliament – Key findings

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.

What is the Next Chapter for Pets and Strata?

If you are an owner or occupier of strata property,  you could not help but notice the flurry of activity over the last couple of years, both at a legislative level and in the Courts of New South Wales in relation to the question of pets.

In the next (but probably not the last) instalment of this saga, the New South Wales Government is implementing amendments to the legislation and to regulations, to commence on 25 August 2021.

Amendment to the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015

Commencing on 25 August 2021, section 137B will be inserted into the Act. Section 137B effectively prevents a by-law, or a decision of an owners corporation under a by-law, from banning the keeping of an animal within a strata scheme unless the animal unreasonably interferes with another occupant’s use and enjoyment of their lot or the common property.

The question which arises from this section is what is meant by “unreasonably interferes with another occupant’s enjoyment of their lot or the common property”?

The New Regulation

Also, now to commence on 25 August 2021 is the Strata Schemes Amendment (Pets) Regulation.

The specific purpose of this regulation is to set out, for the purposes of section 137B, the circumstances in which the keeping of an animal unreasonably interferes with an owner or occupant’s use and enjoyment of their lot.

In short, this new regulation says that an animal will cause an “unreasonable interference” with an owner or occupant’s use and enjoyment of their lot if:

• the animal makes a noise which interferes with the peace, comfort and convenience of another occupant;
• the animal repeatedly runs at or chases another occupant, visitor or another animal;
• the animal repeatedly causes damage to the common property or to another lot;
• the animal endangers the heath of another occupant through infection or infestation;
• the animal causes a persistent offensive odour that penetrates another lot or the common property; or
• for dogs and cats, the owner of the animal fails to comply with orders under the Companion Animals Act 1998.

The provisions also pick up the provisions of the Companion Animals Act 1998 which refer to a “restricted” dog and a “menacing or dangerous” dog. Those dogs will be able to be banned from strata buildings.

Conclusion

It will be interesting to see whether these additions to the strata legislation assist or provide more interpretive problems for owners corporations.

Author I Warwick van Ede I Lawyer I BEc LLM Acc Spec (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.