NSW Tribunal Rejects Application for Common Property Repairs
📌 In brief
A strata scheme member applied to have common property repairs carried out but was unsuccessful. The Tribunal ruled that because the strata scheme had already started legal proceedings against a contractor for the same issues, it could delay making those repairs under the Strata Schemes Management Act.
⚖️ Legal holding
A strata scheme is not required to comply with its obligation to maintain and repair common property if it has commenced legal action against another party regarding those defects.
📚 Full judgment
The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.
📄 Read the full judgment⚖️ View on the official court website ↗
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The strata scheme can defer compliance with its duty to repair common property under Section 106(4) of the SSM Act if it has taken legal action against another party regarding damage.
- The respondent's Home Building Complaint constitutes an "action" for the purposes of deferring maintenance obligations until resolution.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The applicants' claim that the strata scheme must immediately repair common property defects without considering ongoing legal proceedings was rejected.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The application to repair common property defects was dismissed.
What was the dispute about?
A strata scheme member requested repairs for water ponding and other issues on common property, but the strata scheme argued it could defer these obligations due to ongoing legal action.
How did the court decide, and why?
The Tribunal dismissed the application because the respondent had commenced legal proceedings against another party regarding the defects, allowing it to defer repairs under s. 106(4) of the Strata Schemes Management Act.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW) ss 106(4), 232.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The respondent's legal action against another party regarding defects allowed it to defer compliance with its repair obligations under s. 106(4).
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
Against the applicant.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
If a strata scheme has commenced legal action regarding defects, it may defer repair obligations under s. 106(4) of the Strata Schemes Management Act.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The litigation compliant report and Home Building Complaint were key in supporting the respondent's argument.