HAPGOOD-STRICKLAND and WATSON

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, the case of HAPGOOD-STRICKLAND and WATSON arose, where the plaintiff sought to recover from the defendant their respective shares of a strata insurance premium. The dispute involved a two-lot single-tier strata scheme. The plaintiff applied for an order to recover from the defendant their respective shares of the insurance premium. The primary legal issues centred on whether the share of the insurance premium was an 'amount due to the strata company' and whether the premium was 'for insurance under clause 53D'. Additionally, the court had to determine the extent of the strata company's insurance function, whether the buildings comprising the lots were part of the common property, and the extent of the common property, as well as determining the lot boundaries.

The court examined the strata plan and the by-laws to interpret the terms 'amount due to the strata company' and 'for insurance under clause 53D'. The court held that the share of the insurance premium was indeed an 'amount due to the strata company', as it was part of the expenses associated with maintaining the common property. Regarding the second issue, the court found that the premium was for insurance under clause 53D, as it pertained to the insurance of the common property, which included the buildings on the lots. The court concluded that the strata company's insurance function extended to covering the common property, which in this case included the buildings on the lots.

After considering the evidence and arguments presented, the court found in favour of the plaintiff. The court ordered the defendant to pay their respective share of the insurance premium to the plaintiff, as it was an amount due to the strata company for insurance under clause 53D. The court's decision provided clarity on the extent of the strata company's insurance function and the inclusion of the buildings on the lots as part of the common property.