Lyon v The Owners Strata Plan No 11045

Link copied
Case Copied 35 min read

Civil and Administrative Tribunal


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Lyon v The Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 [2023] NSWCATCD 31
Hearing dates: 17 February 2023
Date of orders: 31 March 2023
Decision date: 31 March 2023
Jurisdiction:Consumer and Commercial Division
Before: M Deane, Senior Member
Decision:

(1) The Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 is to take all necessary steps to require the owner of Lot 31 to comply with Special By-law 14; that is, by requiring the owner of Lot 31 to reduce the height of the pergola to 2.7 metres measured from the concrete surface of the courtyard to Lot 31.

(2) The Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 is to comply with order 1 within 6 months of the date of these orders.

(3) The Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 is to arrange for the cleaning of the wall above the pergola at lot 31 and below the windows of lot 35 within 2 months of the date of this order.

(4) Ben Swanson is removed as the second respondent.

(5) Either party may file and serve written submissions of not more than 5 pages within 14 days of the date of this decision seeking an order in relation to the costs of the proceedings.

(6) If either party files submissions in accordance with order (5), the other party may file submissions in response within a further 14 days.

(7) Any submissions filed in accordance with orders (4) and (5) must address the question whether the question of costs may be determined on the papers and without a hearing pursuant to s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)

Catchwords:

LAND LAW — Strata title — Common property — By-laws

Legislation Cited:

Strata Schemes Management Act 2015

Cases Cited:

Bate v The Owners-Strata Plan No SP 60549; Birdsall v Bate [2018] NSWCATCD 36

Glenquarry Park Investments Pty Ltd v Hegyesi [2019] NSWSC 425

Owners Corporation SP 22607 v Yang [2018] NSWCATCD 3 (‘Yang’);

The Owners – Strata Plan No 5319 v Price; Price v The Owners – Strata Plan No 5319 [2019] NSWCATCD 3

The Owners - Strata Plan No 68255 v Downs; Downs v The Owners - Strata Plan No 68255 [2021] NSWCATCD 34

The Owners – Strata Plan No 74232 v Tezel [2023] NSWCA 35

Texts Cited:

Nil

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Suzanne Lyon (applicant)
The Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 (first respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
Applicant (self-represented)
Bannerman Lawyers (First respondent)
No appearance for second respondent
File Number(s): SC22/39017
Publication restriction: Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

  1. The applicant, Suzanne Lyon, is the owner of Lot 35 in Strata Plan 11045, a 69 lot strata scheme in Wollstonecraft, NSW.

  2. The essence of the applicant’s case was that on 26 August 2020 the OC had passed a common property by-law (Special by-law 14) allowing the owners of Lot 31 (the ground floor unit below) to build a pergola over the rear courtyard to Lot 31. The applicant…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Lyon v The Owners Strata Plan No 11045 and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2023] NSWCATCD 31
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Lyon was a resident of the strata scheme and brought an action against the Owners – Strata Plan No 11045, seeking a declaration that a pergola erected on lot 31 was in breach of Special By-law 14 and was of such a height as to cause harm to the health and safety of the residents of the strata scheme. The Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 filed an application to have Lyon's proceedings dismissed on the basis that they were an abuse of process. The Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 argued that Lyon's action was an abuse of process because the dispute was one that should be resolved in accordance with the strata scheme's by-laws, rather than through court proceedings. The Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 also argued that Lyon had not followed the internal dispute resolution procedure provided for in the strata scheme's by-laws.

The court found that the Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 had not established that Lyon's proceedings were an abuse of process. The court held that the internal dispute resolution procedure was not a mandatory requirement, and that it was not necessary for Lyon to have followed it before bringing proceedings in the tribunal. The court further held that the Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 had not demonstrated that the application to dismiss was necessary in the interests of justice. The court found that the application to dismiss should be dismissed with costs.

The court found that the pergola erected on lot 31 was in breach of Special By-law 14, as it was of a greater height than that permitted by the by-law. The court found that the pergola was of a height that was likely to cause harm to the health and safety of the residents of the strata scheme. The court ordered that the Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 take all necessary steps to require the owner of lot 31 to reduce the height of the pergola. The court further ordered that the Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 arrange for the cleaning of the wall above the pergola at lot 31 and below the windows of lot 35. The court dismissed the application to dismiss and ordered that the proceedings continue.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) The Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 is to take all necessary steps to require the owner of Lot 31 to comply with Special By-law 14; that is, by requiring the owner of Lot 31 to reduce the height of the pergola to 2.7 metres measured from the concrete surface of the courtyard to Lot 31.

(2) The Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 is to comply with order 1 within 6 months of the date of these orders.

(3) The Owners – Strata Plan No 11045 is to arrange for the cleaning of the wall above the pergola at lot 31 and below the windows of lot 35 within 2 months of the date of this order.

(4) Ben Swanson is removed as the second respondent.

(5) Either party may file and serve written submissions of not more than 5 pages within 14 days of the date of this decision seeking an order in relation to the costs of the proceedings.

(6) If either party files submissions in accordance with order (5), the other party may file submissions in response within a further 14 days.

(7) Any submissions filed in accordance with orders (4) and (5) must address the question whether the question of costs may be determined on the papers and without a hearing pursuant to s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.