The applicant is the owners corporation of Units Plan 3217. The first respondent, AJ Properties Pty Ltd, is the owner of unit 13. The second respondent, Xbox Projects Pty Ltd, is the owner of units 11, 12 and 14. There was a fire which damaged units 11, 12, 13 and 14. The premises were insured…
The respondents are owners of a unit and members of the applicant owners corporation. The applicant applied to the Tribunal for orders in relation to a range of unapproved alterations the respondents had made without the consent of the executive committee in contravention of Article 4(1) of the Articles of the Units Plan. At the…
The applicants were the owners of a unit in Units Plan 3488. One morning when the applicants were not present in the unit, a hose connected to the mains in the toilet cistern broke and water flowed out of the cistern into the apartment and into the common property in the hallway. There was consequent…
The respondent was the owner of unit 2 and the applicant the owners corporation. The total claimed was: (a) balance of levies owed ($602.93); (b) ACAT filing fee; (c) legal expenses for preparation of and attendance at the hearing and the mediation; and (d) witness expenses.
The respondent argued that the legal and administrative expenses were…
The applicant sought an order from ACAT that the owners corporation issue a rule infringement notice for various alleged breaches of House Rules and rules of the owners corporation.
In response, ACAT held that there is no general power in section 129 of the UTMA to order the executive committee or the owners corporation to exercise…
The owners corporation appealed a number of aspects of the original decision. The appeal was dealt with as a review under section 82(b) of the ACAT Act and the owners corporation needed to establish an error of fact or law in the original decision in order to succeed. The exercise of some of the powers…
The applicant is the Owners Units Plan No. 14 and the respondent is Mr Wright from Unit 2.
Since 2009 the owners had been trying to stop Mr Wright from using the common car park to store cars and car parts in ways which annoyed and inconvenienced other owners. The owners were also at times concerned,…
This matter concerns a residential property at Lyneham, ACT where the applicant was the executive committee and the respondent an owner of unit 29.
Around February 2019 a complaint was received by the executive committee about caravans/campers/boats parked in driveways at the property. The complaint stated that driveways are available for the use provided any parked…
The applicant, Antico Holdings Pty Ltd, sought to amend the Crown Lease Purpose Clause for a property to allow an “Indoor recreation facility LIMITED to a gym/fitness centre” to operate in units owned by the applicant.
Only one owner, Mr Lewis, ultimately opposed this variation. Section 166 of the Unit Titles Act 2001 (ACT) (as it…
Mr Butt commenced ACAT proceedings against the owners corporation requesting that ACAT set aside a resolution made by the owners corporation approving a specified sinking fund contribution on the grounds that the resolution was not in compliance with the requirements of the Unit Titles (Management) Act 2011 (ACT).
Mr Butt first argued that there was no…
The proxy form used by an owners corporation for their Annual General Meeting provided that:
“I/WE HEREBY APPOINT [must be a Unit Owner in UP 2737] OR failing him/her, the CHAIRPERSON to act as my/our PROXY at the Annual General Meeting of the Owners – Units Plan 2737 to be held on 16 August 2010 or…
A number of owners signed a petition to the strata manager of an owners corporation requesting the executive committee call a general meeting to consider a motion to remove all the existing executive committee members and appoint new members.
The strata manager sent a copy of the petition to the executive committee and called a general…