ROBINSON and STEVENS
Case
•
[2009] WASAT 207
•23 OCTOBER 2009
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
ROBINSON and STEVENS [2009] WASAT 207
[2009] WASAT 207
23 OCTOBER 2009
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The plaintiffs sought an order from the Tribunal to remove unauthorised installations from common property and for the property to be repaired. The plaintiffs also sought an alternative order for a licence to permit the installations to remain. The defendant opposed both requests, and the Tribunal considered the matter. The court was required to determine whether the Tribunal had the discretion to order the removal of the installations and the repair of the common property, and whether the Tribunal could impose conditions for the continued presence of the installations on the common property.
The court found that the Tribunal did have the power to order the removal of the unauthorised installations and the repair of the common property. The court noted that the relevant legislation provided for the Tribunal to make orders to rectify unauthorised works on common property. The court also found that the Tribunal had the discretion to impose conditions for the continued presence of the installations on the common property. The court considered that the Tribunal could impose conditions that would ensure that the installations did not cause any harm or inconvenience to other lot owners or the body corporate.
The court found in favour of the plaintiffs and ordered the defendant to remove the unauthorised installations from the common property and repair the property. The court also ordered that the defendant could apply for a licence to permit the installations to remain on the common property, subject to conditions imposed by the Tribunal. The court noted that the Tribunal had the power to impose conditions that would ensure that the installations did not cause any harm or inconvenience to other lot owners or the body corporate. The court considered that the Tribunal's decision was reasonable and lawful.
The court made an order that the defendant remove the unauthorised installations from the common property and repair the property within a specified time frame. The court also made an order that the defendant could apply for a licence to permit the installations to remain on the common property, subject to conditions imposed by the Tribunal. The court considered that the Tribunal's decision was reasonable and lawful and that the orders made by the court were appropriate.
The court found that the Tribunal did have the power to order the removal of the unauthorised installations and the repair of the common property. The court noted that the relevant legislation provided for the Tribunal to make orders to rectify unauthorised works on common property. The court also found that the Tribunal had the discretion to impose conditions for the continued presence of the installations on the common property. The court considered that the Tribunal could impose conditions that would ensure that the installations did not cause any harm or inconvenience to other lot owners or the body corporate.
The court found in favour of the plaintiffs and ordered the defendant to remove the unauthorised installations from the common property and repair the property. The court also ordered that the defendant could apply for a licence to permit the installations to remain on the common property, subject to conditions imposed by the Tribunal. The court noted that the Tribunal had the power to impose conditions that would ensure that the installations did not cause any harm or inconvenience to other lot owners or the body corporate. The court considered that the Tribunal's decision was reasonable and lawful.
The court made an order that the defendant remove the unauthorised installations from the common property and repair the property within a specified time frame. The court also made an order that the defendant could apply for a licence to permit the installations to remain on the common property, subject to conditions imposed by the Tribunal. The court considered that the Tribunal's decision was reasonable and lawful and that the orders made by the court were appropriate.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Property Law
Legal Concepts
-
Unauthorised Works
-
Common Property
-
Discretion of Tribunal
-
Conditions for Fixtures
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
ROBINSON and STEVENS [2009] WASAT 207
Most Recent Citation
GSG HOLDINGS PTY LTD and BOWE [2023] WASAT 68
Cases Citing This Decision
12
THE OWNERS OF MATILDA UNITS, STRATA SCHEME 33443 and METZGER
[2023] WASAT 114
VAN RENSBURG and OWNERS OF OCEAN MARINA POINTE STRATA PLAN 45077
[2023] WASAT 94
GSG HOLDINGS PTY LTD and BOWE
[2023] WASAT 68
Cases Cited
6
Statutory Material Cited
1
Stanley and Owners of Waterloo Heights Strata Plan 4192
[2009] WASAT 55
HUSIC and BIANCUZZO
[2009] WASAT 192
Arasi & Anor and The Owners of Beverley Court
[2005] WASAT 197