andyj said
… however there was always the unspoken “understanding” that owners had all the rights and power in the complex and tenants were merely renters with few rights…
If you were in the ACT the wording of the default rules (aka by-laws, articles) is, for example, “A unit owner must not use the unit, or permit it to be used, in a way that causes a nuisance or substantial annoyance to an owner, occupier or user of another unit.” Similar wording is used for other rules about use of the common property, hazardous use etc.
Under definitions, the default rules have “In these rules: … owner, occupier or user, of a unit, includes an invitee or licensee of an owner, occupier or user of a unit.”
I take this to mean that pretty much everything applies equally to owners and tenants. The only exception I can think of potentially gives tenants additional freedoms not available to owners in as much as a rule has no effect if it is inconsistent with any legislation, including legislation that give protections to tenants.
Perhaps the wording is similar in other states or territories. If not, by-laws/rules can be changed at a general meeting to explicitly apply fairly and equally to owners and tenants (and guests and any other user of a unit) and it would probably be in the interests of owners to make it so. I expect it would be easy to add one rule to say “All rights and obligations imposed in these rules apply equally to owners, tenants and any other occupier or user of a unit, including their invitees and licencees.” That would be useful both to make explicit that tenants have the same rights as everyone else to enjoy their unit and the common property safely and peacefully etc but also that they have the same constraints on poor behaviour as anyone else, no more, no less.