Nolan v Owners Units Corporation No 369 (Unit Titles)

The applicant, Nolan, sought a determination from the ACAT regarding the legality of replacing carpet flooring with a bamboo floating floor in their unit. The dispute arose because the owners corporation, Owners Units Corporation No 369, had refused to approve the change, claiming it required unanimous consent under the Unit Titles (Management) Act 2011. Nolan argued that the change was merely a replacement of floor covering and did not constitute a structural alteration.

The court was required to determine whether the proposed replacement of the flooring constituted a structural alteration that needed approval from the owners corporation. The court had to examine the definition of a structural alteration under the Act and consider whether the change of floor covering required the unanimous consent of all unit owners as per the Act's default rules. Additionally, the court needed to address whether the concern of an adjoining unit owner could be a reason for not convening a general meeting of the owners corporation.

The ACAT found that the replacement of the carpet with a bamboo floating floor did not constitute an erection or alteration to the structure as defined in the Act. The Tribunal held that the change was merely a replacement of floor covering and did not require the approval of the owners corporation. The ACAT emphasised that the concern of an adjoining unit owner should not be a reason for not calling a general meeting, as such meetings provide an opportunity to present information to all unit owners. The Tribunal determined that the replacement of the flooring did not require the approval of the owners corporation.

The Tribunal ordered that the removal of carpets and the installation of a floating bamboo floor did not constitute an erection or alteration to the structure under the Act and did not require the approval of the owners corporation.