Low v The Owners Strata Plan No. 35790
Case
•
[2016] FCCA 900
•22 April 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Low v The Owners Strata Plan No. 35790 [2016] FCCA 900
[2016] FCCA 900
22 April 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The applicant, Mr. Low, sought to recover damages from the respondent, The Owners Strata Plan No. 35790, for alleged breaches of statutory duties under the *Strata Schemes Management Act 2015* (NSW) and the common law. The dispute concerned the respondent's alleged failure to maintain and repair common property, specifically a balcony and associated waterproofing, which Mr. Low contended caused water damage to his property. The matter was heard in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT).
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the respondent had breached its statutory duty to maintain and repair the common property, and if so, whether such breach caused the damage suffered by Mr. Low. Further, the Tribunal had to consider whether the respondent had breached its duty of care at common law in relation to the maintenance of the common property.
Judge Barnes found that the respondent had failed to establish that it had taken all reasonable steps to maintain and repair the common property in accordance with its statutory obligations. The evidence indicated a lack of timely and adequate action in addressing the known issues with the balcony's waterproofing. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the respondent had breached its statutory duty and was liable for the resulting damage to Mr. Low's property. The common law duty of care was also considered breached due to the respondent's inaction.
The Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay damages to Mr. Low for the cost of rectifying the water damage to his property.
The Tribunal was required to determine whether the respondent had breached its statutory duty to maintain and repair the common property, and if so, whether such breach caused the damage suffered by Mr. Low. Further, the Tribunal had to consider whether the respondent had breached its duty of care at common law in relation to the maintenance of the common property.
Judge Barnes found that the respondent had failed to establish that it had taken all reasonable steps to maintain and repair the common property in accordance with its statutory obligations. The evidence indicated a lack of timely and adequate action in addressing the known issues with the balcony's waterproofing. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the respondent had breached its statutory duty and was liable for the resulting damage to Mr. Low's property. The common law duty of care was also considered breached due to the respondent's inaction.
The Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay damages to Mr. Low for the cost of rectifying the water damage to his property.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
-
Property Law
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Costs
-
Jurisdiction
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Standing
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Low v The Owners Strata Plan No. 35790 [2016] FCA 949
Cases Cited
24
Statutory Material Cited
6
Totev v Sfar
[2008] FCAFC 35
Commonwealth Bank of Australia Trading as Bankwest v Mastronardo
[2019] FCCA 2371
Commonwealth Bank of Australia Trading as Bankwest v Mastronardo
[2019] FCCA 2371