Barzinpour v Owners Corporation Unit Plan 999 & Ors (Unit Titles)

In the case of Barzinpour v Owners Corporation Unit Plan 999 & Ors, the dispute centred around the renovation of common property without the approval of the owners corporation and in the absence of a motion at a general meeting. The plaintiff, Mr Barzinpour, contested the removal of a conifer hedge and the installation of a pavement. After the removal of the hedge, the owners corporation planted camellias in its place. Mr Barzinpour applied for a declaration that the owners corporation's actions were unlawful, that the conifer hedge should be restored, and for an injunction to prevent further landscaping works. The case was heard in the Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the owners corporation had the authority to carry out the landscaping works on the common property without the approval of the owners. The Tribunal had to determine if the owners corporation acted within its powers under the Unit Titles Act and whether the changes to the common property were justified. Additionally, the Tribunal had to consider whether the owners corporation's actions constituted a breach of its duties under the Act.

The Tribunal concluded that while the owners corporation did not have the approval of the owners or a motion at a general meeting, the common property was restored in part. The Tribunal directed the owners corporation to consider granting a special privilege in the future. As a settlement had been reached between the parties, the Tribunal dismissed the application without making any findings of fault. The Tribunal noted that the replacement of the conifers would occur as per the agreed terms, and the owners corporation would maintain the conifers in the future.

The final order of the Tribunal was that the application was withdrawn and dismissed. The Tribunal also noted that the replacement of the conifers would occur in accordance with the terms agreed upon by the parties, including the removal of camellias, replanting of conifers, and maintenance of the conifers by the owners corporation. The Tribunal did not make any determination on the issue of whether the owners corporation's actions were lawful or not, as the parties had reached an agreement.