NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Adendorff v The Owners - Strata Plan No. 16629 [2021] NSWCATCD 76 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 02 August 2021 Decision date: 02 August 2021 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: K Ross, Senior Member Decision: 1 An order is made pursuant to s 50 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, dispensing with a hearing. 2 The costs applications are dismissed. Catchwords: COSTS — Where Rule 38 does not apply — Special circumstances Legislation Cited: Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2013 (NSW) Cases Cited: The Owners Corporation Strata Plan No. 63341 v Malachite Holdings Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCATAP 256 Megerditchian v Kurmond Homes Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCATAP 120 Texts Cited: Nil Category: Costs Parties: Tracey Adendorff (Applicant) The Owners - Strata Plan No. 16629 Representation: Australian Business Lawyers & Advisors (Respondent) File Number(s): SC20/29714, SC20/29716 and SC20/34752 Publication restriction: Nil
REASONS FOR DECISION
Applications 1. These applications concern a 2 storey commercial building in Coffs Harbour. There are 7 lots in the strata scheme comprising SP 16229. The applicant in files SC20/29714 and SC20/29716, Tracey Adendorff, and her husband Michael Adendorff ("the Lot Owners") are the owners of lot 6 in the strata plan. The Owners SP 16229 ("the Owners Corporation") is the respondent. 2. On 31 July 2020 the Tribunal made an interim order on file SC20/29714, staying motions 9, 10 and 11 passed at the AGM on 29 June 2020 until further order or the finalisation of SC20/29716. 3. On 13 August 2020, the Owners Corporation filed application SC20/34752. The Lot Owners are the respondents. 4. The Tribunal published its decision in respect of all 3 applications on 9 June 2021. Application SC 20/29716 was dismissed. The order made on 31 July 2020 on SC 20/29714 was revoked and the stay was lifted. On application SC 20/34752, the Owners Corporation was successful, and the Lot Owners were ordered to remove the works for which authorisation from the Owners Corporation had not been obtained. 5. The Tribunal provided for the parties to make submissions in respect of costs. The Owners Corporation filed submissions seeking that the Lot Owners pay its costs in respect of all three applications. 6. The Lot Owners have not filed any submissions in reply. 7. This is the decision in respect of the cost applications.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate