Safe Work Prosecutes Strata Manager, OC & Lot Owner

In August of this year the criminal jurisdiction of the District Court of New South Wales handed down the last of a series of decisions in relation to the penalties to be imposed on a strata scheme, strata manager and lot owner respectively, arising from a death which had occurred following a damaged gate in an industrial strata scheme falling on a person.

Although these decisions focus upon the criminal prosecution brought against the strata scheme strata manager and lot owner by Safe Work NSW, the circumstances are illustrative for owners corporations and strata managers generally.

Background Incidents

The strata scheme in question was an 8 lot industrial strata scheme around which was built a perimeter fence including a custom-built sliding electric gate.  The gate included guide posts and an end stopper to prevent the gate from over travelling in the closing direction.  The gate was approximately 8.5 metres long and 2 metres high.

In June 2020 an incident occurred whereby the gate was impacted at high speed by a van.  Although the gate remained upright it was bent out of shape, partially pulled off its track and disconnected from its electric motor.  In addition, the guide posts for the gate were damaged and the stopper had come out of position and was no longer capable of preventing over travel of the gate.  Whilst NSW Emergency Services attended the site immediately following the collision, and took steps to secure the gate and perimeter fence, no additional steps were taken to repair, replace or make it safe.

On 5 June 2020 a member of the owners corporation contacted the strata manager to advise of the damage to the gate.  Between 5 and 12 June 2020 the gate was opened and closed manually by various workers at the site.

On the morning of 5 June 2020 a representative of the strata manager issued a work order to a contractor to repair the damage, but did not arrange for the gate to be repaired or replaced as a matter of urgency.  In contrast, damage to the water meter at the owners corporation was repaired on 5 June 2020 on an urgent basis.

Neither the owners corporation nor the strata manager arranged for a risk assessment to be conducted in relation to the damaged gate nor was the gate placed out of service following the damage nor was it removed and nor was a sign posted to the effect that the gate was not operational pending its full repair or replacement.  Neither the owners corporation nor the strata manager took any action to prevent the manual operation of the gate or to post signs advising the gate was not to be operated manually until it had been fully repaired or replaced.

The following day, a number of occupants within the strata scheme undertook makeshift repairs to the gate, without notifying the strata manager.  These repairs were ad hoc in nature and did not eliminate or otherwise address the risk of the gate falling or collapsing.

Approximately one week later an employee of one of the businesses operating from the strata scheme and attempted to operate the gate manually but in the circumstances including a lack of a physical stopper and the damaged guide posts the gate became unstable and fell onto that person.  The worker sustained fatal crush injuries as a result of the incident.  The business was also prosecuted by Safe Work NSW as a result of the injury and death suffered by one of its employees.

Criminal Case Against the Owners Corporation

The owners corporation accepted that it had failed in its duty to comply under the Work Health and Safety Legislation in that it did not:

  • either itself or require the strata manager to arrange an immediate risk assessment in relation to the safety and security issues;
  • take the gate out of service immediately and post signage to the effect that the gate was not to be operated manually until it was fully repaired or replaced;
  • implement itself or require the strata manager to implement measure to keep persons away from the damaged gate;
  • direct that the damaged gate not be touched or remain open or unlocked pending repair or replacement; and
  • develop and implement a safe work method statement for the manual operation of the gate.

The owners corporation was ordered to pay a fine of $225,000.00 as well as the prosecutor’s costs of $40,000.00.

Criminal Case Against the Strata Manager

The following failures were identified as a managerial breach of the strata manager’s breach of duty under the Work Health and Safety Legislation in that the strata manager’s duties included:

  • requiring a competent person to repair or replace the damaged gate following notification on 5 June 2020 of the damage to that gate;
  • arranging for the damaged gate to be immediately taken out of service and to prevent it being manually operated until repairs and replacement of the gate had been completed;
  • communicating to owners and occupants of the owners corporation by means such as signs and barricades that the damaged gate should not be operated unless and until the operation of the gate had been deemed to be safe by a competent person; and
  • confirming and follow up with relevant competent persons to require timeframes for repair and replacement once the strata manager had been notified by the owners corporation of the damage to the gate.

The strata manager was ordered to pay a fine of $150,000.00 as well as the prosecutor’s costs.

Criminal Case Against the Business

The following failures were identified as a breach of the business’ failure to comply with its duty under the Work Health and Safety Legislation:

  • failing to direct its workers not to manually operate the gate whilst it was damaged;
  • failing to direct that the damaged gate remain open unlocked prior to its replacement or repair by a competent person;
  • failing to implement and develop a safe system of work for operating and/or using the damaged gate during the period prior to its replacement or repair;
  • failing to develop a safe work method statement or safe work procedure for the manual operation of the gate;
  • failing to train and instruct its workers in a safe system of work and work method statement;
  • failing to raise safety concerns with the owners corporation and/or with the appointed strata manager about the daily routine of workers manually operating the damaged gate.

The business was fined $375,000.00 and was ordered to pay the prosecutor’s costs in the amount of $44,000.00.

Some Relevant Observations for Owners Corporations and Strata Managers

Each of the parties prosecuted, the lot owners, the owners corporation and the strata manager were identified as having failed to have taken steps which each of them could have done to avoid the death.

Importantly, the Court identified that these steps could have been taken with little or no burden placed on the party concerned.  Examples of the steps which could have been taken included:

  • the lot owner directing its employees not to operate the gate manually;
  • the owners corporation directing that all occupants of the strata scheme do not operate the gate manually;
  • the owners corporation taking steps to make sure the gate was “out of action” until such time as it had been repaired;
  • the owners corporation directing owners and occupants of the strata scheme that they did not have permission or authority to repair common property;
  • the strata manager failing to implement a safe work plan in relation to the damaged gate, once they became aware that the gate had been damaged;
  • the strata manager failing to pursue the clearly required repairs and/or replacement of the gate with sufficient urgency;

Conclusion

Failures of common property are more than an annoyance.  The failure of an owners corporation and strata manager (and in some instances lot owners) to address failures of common property can lead to tragic outcomes.

It is critical that owners corporation take seriously their responsibilities pursuant to s106 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 to repair and maintain common property, and these cases illustrate that it is insufficient for owners corporations and strata managers to operate on the assumption that repairs and maintenance can occur “in due course”.  In each instance, a proper analysis needs to be undertaken of the potential impact of each failure of common property and each instance where common property needs to be repaired.

If an owners corporation or strata manager is in any doubt in relation to these matters they should seek advice immediately.


Warwick van Ede Specialist Strata Lawyer and Accredited Property Lawyer

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.




National Fire Prevention Month Event ‘E-bikes in Strata’

Spring is here, and the risk of e-bike and e-scooter fires could rise as owners take advantage of the warmer weather. As these temperatures warm-up, so too does the likelihood of these light electric vehicles being left unattended in common areas to charge overnight.

September’s National Fire Prevention Month serves as a timely reminder of the serious dangers these fires pose. Tragically, hundreds of people across Australia (and worldwide) have been injured or killed due to e-vehicle fires, and online footage showcases the devastating power of these blazes.

To address this growing concern, FPA Australia has organized events like ‘Not so Safe Storage: The Risk of Light EVs in Common Areas’ as part of National Fire Protection Month during September. These initiatives aim to promote awareness and educate residents and the strata industry about the importance of safe e-vehicle charging and storage practices.

Implementing a well-crafted by-law is also a proactive step to mitigate the risk of e-vehicle fires in strata schemes. By establishing clear guidelines for charging, storage, registration, and resident education, owners corporations can significantly enhance the safety of their communities.


REDUCE YOUR FIRE RISK TODAY WITH AN E-BIKE / E-SCOOTER BY-LAW


Adrian Mueller Partner JS Mueller & Co Lawyers specialising in Strata Law

Adrian Mueller I BCOM LLB FACCAL I Partner

Since 2002 Adrian has specialised almost exclusively in the area of strata law. His knowledge of, and experience in strata law is second to none. He is the youngest person to have been admitted as a Fellow of the ACSL, the peak body for strata lawyers in Australia. Profile I Linked

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. 




How Safe is Your Strata Scheme?

It is predicted that the Australian home security market will grow by US$6.56 billion dollars by 2030, a 15.73% annual growth from 2024 to 2030*.

What is driving this growth?

This surge is driven by several factors:

  • Increased crime rates are making people want to feel secure in their homes and communities.
  • Technological advancements offer a wider range of affordable security options.
  • The growing popularity of strata living has led to increased demand for communal security measures.

What about privacy?

While residents crave safety, privacy concerns are also on the rise.

The issue is what rights do strata lot owners and owners corporations have to install their own security? Security cameras, in particular, can create complex issues under differing legislation.

Owners corporations and residents should be mindful of their rights under the Surveillance Devices Act 2007 (NSW) to avoid committing any offence.

These two NCAT cases share some valuable lessons Strata, Owners Corporations Lot Owners and Security Cameras

Do you need a by-law?

A well-crafted CCTV by-law is essential for managing security while protecting privacy.

If you need help developing or updating your strata scheme’s CCTV by-law, our experts can assist you.

Contact us today for expert advice, we’re happy to help.

* Source: Research and Markets March 2024


DO YOU NEED TO DEVELOP OR UPDATE YOUR CCTV BY-LAW?


Adrian Mueller Partner JS Mueller & Co Lawyers specialising in Strata Law

Adrian Mueller I BCOM LLB FACCAL I Partner

Since 2002 Adrian has specialised almost exclusively in the area of strata law. His knowledge of, and experience in strata law is second to none. He is the youngest person to have been admitted as a Fellow of the ACSL, the peak body for strata lawyers in Australia. Profile I Linked

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.




New Landmark Defamation Laws for the Digital Age

As of 1 July 2024, NSW (and ACT) became the first state in Australia to adopt new and modern defamation laws for the digital age.

Led by the NSW Government the changes in the Defamation Amendment Act 2023 (NSW) will improve the balance between freedom of speech and protection of reputation when someone publishes content through a digital intermediary.

Examples of digital intermediaries include:

  • Social Media Platforms
  • Review Websites
  • Search Engines
  • Content Hosts
  • Service Providers
  • Individuals and organisations who use online platforms to host forums inviting third-party comments (known as forum administrators).

Part A reforms include:

  • two conditional statutory exemptions from defamation liability for a narrow group of digital intermediaries, including search engines in relation to organic search results (non-sponsored search results)
  • a new innocent dissemination defence for digital intermediaries, subject to a simple complaints process
  • empowering courts to order digital intermediaries to prevent access to defamatory content online, even when they are not parties to defamation proceedings
  • requiring courts to consider safety, privacy and the public interest when making orders against digital intermediaries to provide the identity or contact details of a poster of online content

To read the full bill and other information including Stage 2 visit NSW Government.


Adrian Mueller Partner JS Mueller & Co Lawyers specialising in Strata Law

Adrian Mueller I BCOM LLB FACCAL I Partner

Since 2002 Adrian has specialised almost exclusively in the area of strata law. His knowledge of, and experience in strata law is second to none. He is the youngest person to have been admitted as a Fellow of the ACSL, the peak body for strata lawyers in Australia. Profile I Linked

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




Lot Owners, Tenants and Shared Facilities in Strata

A lot owner has an apartment in a strata scheme with shared facilities with a pool, sauna and gym however the owner does not live in that strata scheme because they have rented their apartment out – can they still use the pool, sauna and gym, deemed as shared facilities?

The answer may not be that straight forward and raises many questions:

  • They have rented out their apartment, but the lot owner still pays the levies so wouldn’t they be entitled to use the shared facilities?
  • Even though the lot owner still pays the levies have they signed their rights over to the tenants for use of the shared facilities once they lease the property?
  • Can the lot owner prohibit their tenants from using the apartment facilities thereby by doing so, the owner can have complete access to the facilities as after all they pay the levies?
  • Perhaps the lot owner can still use the facilities, unless there is a specific by-law which prohibits them from using the shared facilities?

The answer is typically this:

  • When an owner leases their lot, they also lease their interests in the common property to their tenant.
  • This means the owner forfeits his or her right to use the common property facilities such as the pool, sauna and gym.
  • In some cases a shrewd owner might change the lease to reserve to the owner the right to continue to use the common property facilities.
  • It is unlikely this would be legally effective because an owner’s interest in the common property cannot be dealt with separately from, or severed from, his or her interest in their lot.
  • However, an astute owner could decide not to lease out part of the lot such as storage room or one of two car spaces. In doing so, the owner could retain his or her interest in the common property and the right to use the common property facilities.

Do you need to review your by-laws?

In some cases it can be very useful to put in place a by-law that makes these rules clear to ensure that common property facilities are not overused.


NEED TO UPDATE YOUR COMMON PROPERTY FACILITIES BY-LAW?


Adrian Mueller Partner JS Mueller & Co Lawyers specialising in Strata Law

Adrian Mueller I BCOM LLB FACCAL I Partner

Since 2002 Adrian has specialised almost exclusively in the area of strata law. His knowledge of, and experience in strata law is second to none. He is the youngest person to have been admitted as a Fellow of the ACSL, the peak body for strata lawyers in Australia. Profile I Linked

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




NSW Proposes Strict E-bike Standards to Reduce Fire

The NSW Government is looking to combat the fastest-growing cause of fires by implementing new product standards for lithium-ion batteries.

NSW Fire and Rescue recorded more than 90 incidences over the 2022-23 period with fires caused by lithium-ion battery powered products and, it continues to escalate.

In response to the growing incidences, NSW Government is taking a proactive stance to ensure products comply with safety standards and are appropriately tested, certified and marked before they enter the market.

When these changes come into effect suppliers, both corporations and individuals, who do not comply will incur heavy penalties.

The prevention of fires, saving lives and protecting property are high on the agenda for the NSW Government as the reality is that e-bikes, e-scooters and other e-devices are here to stay.

For more information visit Media and NSW Government


REDUCE YOUR RISK WITH AN E-BIKE / E-SCOOTER BY-LAW?


Adrian Mueller Partner JS Mueller & Co Lawyers specialising in Strata Law

Adrian Mueller I BCOM LLB FACCAL I Partner

Since 2002 Adrian has specialised almost exclusively in the area of strata law. His knowledge of, and experience in strata law is second to none. He is the youngest person to have been admitted as a Fellow of the ACSL, the peak body for strata lawyers in Australia. Profile I Linked

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.




VIDEO: Water Leaks, NCAT & Common Property

Adrian Mueller talks with Nikki Jovicic, LookUpStrata about the owners corporation’s responsibility to remedy water leaks and defects in NSW strata buildings.

Recent heavy rainfall across NSW has unfortunately led to a surge in water leaks and defects within strata buildings. These leaks can damage both common property and lot property, causing significant frustration and financial burden for apartment owners. As a result, disputes between owners and their owners corporation have become more frequent.

Understanding the Owners Corporation’s Responsibility

The Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW) clearly outlines the owners corporation’s duty to maintain and repair common property. This includes:

  • Maintaining common areas: Roofs, external walls, plumbing systems, balconies, stairwells, and any other areas designated as common property in the strata scheme.
  • Keeping them in a good state of repair: This means addressing any issues that could compromise the structural integrity, safety, or functionality of the common property.
  • Renewing or replacing common property fixtures and fittings: Pipes, waterproofing membranes, sealant around windows, and other elements that naturally deteriorate over time.

Strict Liability and the Duty to Repair

The Act imposes a strict liability on the owners corporation for repairs. This means the owners corporation is responsible for fixing defects in the common property, regardless of cause. Even if the leak originates from faulty original construction or unforeseen circumstances, the owners corporation must address the issue.

This strict liability eliminates the option for the owners corporation to simply deny responsibility for repairs. Delays in fixing leaks, passing resolutions to avoid repairs, or claiming lack of funds are not valid excuses.

Remedies available to Lot Owners when an Owners Corporation Fails to Act

If your apartment suffers damage from water leaks or defects originating in the common property, and the owners corporation fails to take action, you have several options:

  • Apply to NCAT (New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal): You can file an application with NCAT seeking an order that compels the owners corporation to undertake the necessary repairs.
  • Claim Damages: You can pursue compensation for losses incurred due to the water leak. This may include the cost of repairs to your unit, the replacement of damaged belongings, or lost rental income if you were unable to rent out your unit while repairs were ongoing.
  • Administrator Appointment: In extreme cases, NCAT can appoint someone to manage the owners corporation and organise repairs. The compulsory strata manager will take control of the owners corporations affairs and arrange for the repairs to be completed.

Making a Strong Claim for Water Leaks and Defects as a Lot Owner

To maximise your chances of a successful claim, it’s crucial to have a well-documented case. You should:

  • Verify Ownership: Ensure you are the current owner of the affected unit at the time of the claim.
  • Identify the Source: Identify the specific defects in the common property causing the water leaks. This often involves obtaining a professional inspection report from a qualified specialist.
  • Scope of Works: Outline the necessary repairs in a scope of works document. This document should be based on the expert’s recommendations and clearly define the repairs needed to address the leak and prevent future occurrences.
  • Proof of Losses: Gather evidence to substantiate your financial losses. Receipts for repairs to your unit, damaged furniture replacement costs, and rental agreements proving lost income are all valuable documents.
  • Timely Action: Don’t delay! File your claim with NCAT within two years of becoming aware of the water leaks, defects and the resulting damage.

The strict liability makes it difficult for owners corporations to argue they are not responsible for repairs.

Adrian Mueller’s final thoughts for those owners corporations still avoiding their responsibility, at the end of the session: “that’s the law, like it or not…… sometimes you just have to suck it up”.


Adrian Mueller Partner JS Mueller & Co Lawyers specialising in Strata Law

Adrian Mueller I BCOM LLB FACCAL I Partner

Since 2002 Adrian has specialised almost exclusively in the area of strata law. His knowledge of, and experience in strata law is second to none. He is the youngest person to have been admitted as a Fellow of the ACSL, the peak body for strata lawyers in Australia. Profile I Linked

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 Law Reforms Aimed to Improve Transparency

The NSW government has announced that it will introduce strata laws aimed at improving transparency in the industry.

Increasing the maximum penalties and penalty infringement notice amounts around strata managing agents’ obligations to disclose commission information are among some of the planned changes

In summary the NSW Government will implement new laws around:

  • Stricter rules on matters such as commissions
  • Tougher conflicts of interest disclosure requirements
  • Increased penalties that can be imposed on strata agents
  • The banning of agents from taking a commission when they do not play a role in finding the best deal for strata residents
  • Strengthening NSW Fair Trading’s enforcement and compliance powers

The NSW government will consult with the industry ahead of introducing legislation in the coming weeks.


Adrian Mueller Partner JS Mueller & Co Lawyers specialising in Strata Law

Adrian Mueller I BCOM LLB FACCAL I Partner

Since 2002 Adrian has specialised almost exclusively in the area of strata law. His knowledge of, and experience in strata law is second to none. He is the youngest person to have been admitted as a Fellow of the ACSL, the peak body for strata lawyers in Australia. Profile I Linked

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.




Everything You Thought You Knew About Strata is Wrong!

Carpet inside an apartment in a strata building is common property.  So too is paint on the walls and ceiling inside an apartment.  Surely that can’t be right!  But according to two Supreme Court Judges, it is.

Introduction

There are some truths that the strata industry has held to be self-evident for many years.  For example, in the strata industry, it has long been held that carpet inside an apartment in a strata building forms part of the lot and is not common property and that the same can be said for paint on the walls and ceiling inside an apartment.

But sometimes in strata living (as in life) not everything is as it seems.  A recent Supreme Court case makes that clear.

Carpet

In 2021, the owners corporation of a townhouse complex in Tweed Heads South sued the builder of the complex in the Supreme Court for damages arising out of construction defects.  The case was heard by the Supreme Court in May 2024 and on 7 June 2024 the Court published its judgment.

During the course of its judgment, the Supreme Court had to consider whether or not the owners corporation was entitled to recover damages from the builder for consequential damage to carpets inside the townhouses that was caused by defects in the common property that had allowed water to leak into and cause damage to those townhouses including the carpets in them. The builder argued that the carpet inside the townhouses was lot property as a result of which the owners corporation could not claim compensation for the damage to the carpet.

The Supreme Court disagreed.  The Court held that the carpet was installed inside the townhouses before the strata plan was registered and, relying on the Seiwa case, held that the lower horizontal boundary of each townhouse was the upper surface of its floor, namely the carpet.  For these reasons, the Court concluded that the carpet in each townhouse was common property meaning the owners corporation could claim damages for the cost to remove all carpet and underlay and supply and install new carpet to match existing carpet as closely as possible: see The Owners – Strata Plan No. 99960 v SPS Building Contractors Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 687.

Cosmetic Work

The conclusion that carpet inside a strata lot is common property will not sit comfortably with many within the strata industry.  That begs the question: did the Supreme Court get it right?

There is an indication in the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 that it did.  Section 109 of that Act allows an owner of a lot in a strata building to carry out cosmetic work to common property in connection with the owner’s lot without the approval of the owners corporation.  Section 109 provides some examples of cosmetic work including laying carpet.  This indicates that the legislature considered that carpet in a lot forms part of the common property.

Again, this conclusion will still not sit well with many in the strata industry.  So is there any other support for it?

Paint

In 2010, the Supreme Court had to consider a claim by lot owners for damages to cover (among other things) the cost to repair water damage to ceilings and peeling paint work on ceilings in their lot.  The Court concluded that the ceilings and the paint on them were not within the cubic space of the lot and therefore formed part of the common property: see Stolfa v Owners Strata Plan 4366 & Ors [2010] NSWSC 1507.

Again, section 109 of the Act provides support for the conclusion that paint inside a strata lot forms part of the common property.  This is because section 109 says that painting a strata lot is cosmetic work to common property in connection with the lot.

Common Property Memorandum

There is further support for these conclusions in the common property memorandum.  Section 107 of the Act permits an owners corporation to make a by-law to adopt a common property memorandum.  The common property memorandum specifies whether an owner or the owners corporation is responsible for the maintenance and repair of certain common property.

The common property memorandum that has been prescribed under the strata regulations covers paintwork inside a lot including on a ceiling and internal carpeting.  Whilst the common property memorandum allocates responsibility for the maintenance and repair of that paintwork and carpeting to owners, the inclusion of those items in the memorandum lends support to the conclusion that they form part of the common property, as strange as that might seem.

Conclusion

The conclusions reached by the Supreme Court will be surprising to many and turn longstanding thinking in the strata industry about some basic concepts on its head.  Those conclusions are not entirely free from doubt and there is at least one case which goes the other way.  Nevertheless, the Supreme Court decisions should give everyone in the strata industry pause for thought.


Adrian Mueller Partner JS Mueller & Co Lawyers specialising in Strata Law

Adrian Mueller I BCOM LLB FACCAL I Partner

Since 2002 Adrian has specialised almost exclusively in the area of strata law. His knowledge of, and experience in strata law is second to none. He is the youngest person to have been admitted as a Fellow of the ACSL, the peak body for strata lawyers in Australia. Profile I Linked

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.




Building Defects: How do You Prove Systemic Defects?

Introduction

It is an unfortunate reality that many strata apartment buildings contain defects.  Many of those defects are widespread or systemic defects that affect most or all of the lots.  But how far does an owners corporation have to go to prove the existence of systemic defects?  Does the owners corporation have to organise for its experts to inspect each and every lot to prove that those systemic defects exist in each lot?  A recent Supreme Court case provides the answer to that question.

The Case

There is a strata complex containing 45 townhouses in Tweek Heads South.  The complex was built in about 2018 and 2019.  There are defects in the complex.

In 2021, the owners corporation of the complex sued the builder for damages to (among other things) cover the cost to rectify defects throughout the complex.  In the case, the owners corporation claimed that several defects were systemic and present in numerous townhouses.  One of those defects related to waterproofing defects at the outer edge of balconies above garage doors of many townhouses.

The parties’ experts agreed that the beam which spans the outer edge of the balconies on two of the townhouses suffered moisture damage due to the same waterproofing defect on the balconies of those townhouses.  However, the owners corporation’s expert did not inspect any of the other townhouses or carry out any investigations to prove that those defects existed in them.  The builder denied that those same defects existed in the other townhouses and claimed that the owners corporation had not proved its case in that regard.

Proving the Existence of Systemic Defects

The Court agreed with the builder and concluded that the owners corporation had not proven, on the balance of probabilities, that the waterproofing defects and moisture damage to the beams on the outer edge of the balconies existed in any of the other townhouses.  In other words, the Court concluded that the owners corporation had not proven that those defects were systemic.

The Court relied heavily on an earlier decision in The Owners – Strata Plan No. 62930 v Kell & Rigby Holdings Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 612.  In that case, the owners corporation of a block of 14 units argued that no water stops had been installed by the builder in the bathrooms of all 14 units.  The owners corporation’s expert evidence only proved that there were no water stops in the bathrooms of three units.  But the owners corporation claimed that the lack of water stops was a systemic defect present in all of the bathrooms.

The Court held that it could not be inferred from the evidence that established that there were no water stops in three bathrooms that waterproofing work was incorrectly performed in other units and observed that the fact that the waterproofing contractor defectively performed work in a small number of units did not warrant a conclusion that it did so everywhere else.  Importantly, the Court concluded that the burden of proof lay on the owners corporation and that it had chosen to carry out limited destructive testing in three bathrooms only when there was no reason why it could not had done so in all of the units.

In the case involving the townhouse complex in Tweed Head South, the Supreme Court followed the reasoning in Kell & Rigby and concluded that there was insufficient evidence available to support the inference that the balcony waterproofing defect in two townhouses provided a basis for finding that the same defect existed in all 26 townhouses which have front first floor balconies.

Importantly, the Court held that it could not rely on the opinion of the owners corporation’s expert that the defect was systemic due to similar construction details being present in all townhouses because it was not known whether the waterproofing defects that had been identified in two of the townhouses were caused by faulty design or shoddy workmanship.  For all of these reasons, the Court rejected the owners corporation’s claim that the defect on the outer edge of the balconies was a systemic one that affected all such balconies and instead only accepted that the defect existed in two of the balconies that had actually been inspected and tested by the owners corporation’s experts.

Conclusion

The case provides a salutary lesson for owners corporations who wish to pursue a claim against a builder, developer or subcontractor for systemic defects.  Typically, the owners corporation will need to go the extra mile and pay its expert to inspect more than just a handful of lots to ensure that adequate testing and investigations are undertaken to enable the expert to form an opinion that will allow the owners corporation to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the defect in question is widespread and systemic.  In some cases, this will require the expert to inspect and undertake testing and investigations in all of the lots, which in a large strata building, can be expensive.  But that is the unfortunate price an owners corporation must sometimes pay in order to succeed in a claim with respect to systemic defects.

Case: The Owners – Strata Plan 99960 v SPS Building Contractors Pty Ltd [2024] NSWSC 687


Adrian Mueller Partner JS Mueller & Co Lawyers specialising in Strata Law

Adrian Mueller I BCOM LLB FACCAL I Partner

Since 2002 Adrian has specialised almost exclusively in the area of strata law. His knowledge of, and experience in strata law is second to none. He is the youngest person to have been admitted as a Fellow of the ACSL, the peak body for strata lawyers in Australia. Profile I Linked

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.