This case note has been taken from the recently published second-edition of a Guide to ACT Strata Law. A physical copy of the full text can be purchased here.
The applicant was a lot owner seeking orders that the owners corporation remove all documents from a website which had been established by the chairperson of the executive committee to store and access relevant strata documents.
The website kept documents in addition to and not in substitution for the normal hard copy versions of the documents required to be kept by an owners corporation. From 2008, the documents on the website could only be viewed by lot owners and strata officials with passwords.
Amongst various arguments raised by the respondent to resist the application was an argument that ‘the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine the matter as it would amount to censorship of the Internet, privacy is not an issue covered by the SSMA, …’.
NCAT responded by holding that the ‘submissions of the respondent that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction, the Tribunal’s action may amount to ‘censorship’ and arguments based on ‘privacy’ are rejected.’
Unfortunately the reasons for the rejection of these arguments were not given making it very difficult to apply any of the principles from this case.
What is clear from this decision is that the CTTT (which was later replaced by NCAT) will allow documents, which are required to be kept, maintained and stored by the owners corporation under the SSMA, to be held on a website so long as:
(a) such electronic documents are made available to all owners of lots in the strata scheme who apply for a password. In this regard, by asking for a password via email, each lot owner who does so, is making a written request for access (within the meaning of section 108(2) to the documents stored electronically);
b) the documents should be read only documents (except for the administrator’s use); and
(c) a log of any changes to the documents should also be available to those accessing the site
This is general information and should not be considered to be legal advice. You should obtain legal advice specific to your individual situation.
