In your sentence ‘If the owner did want to pursue them for compensation, they’d have to prove that they knew the effect of the by-laws but decided to ignore it.’, Is ‘they’ the committee members or the owner who would have to prove…?
The apartment owner would have to prove that the committee members knew they (the SC) were doing the wrong thing. To do that, the owner would have to show that the committee members had read the by-law, were aware of its conditions and had chosen to ignore them. The apartment owner might (and I stress “might”) then argue that the committee members had not acted in good faith and were therefore no longer protected by the immunity provided by S260 of the Act (below).
I am not a lawyer but I would say that pursuing a claim against the individual members would be harder than taking a Section 232 action against the owners corporation (as represented by the committee) for failure to fulfil their duties. The owners as a whole might, hypothetically, then take action against the committee members for not acting in good faith.
There is still considerable liability resting with the owner who installed the floor and that might be the easiest recourse. That owner might then sue the committee on the grounds that they were misled. Either way, it could ger very messy, very quickly. I would speak to a lawyer before doing anything.
260 Personal liability
(1) A matter or thing done or omitted to be done by any of the following persons, or a person acting under the direction of any of those persons, does not, if the matter or thing was done or omitted to be done in good faith for the purpose of executing functions as such a person under this or any other Act, subject any of the following persons or person so acting personally to any action, liability, claim or demand:
(a) an officer of an owners corporation,
(b) a member of a strata committee.
(2) Any such liability of an officer of an owners corporation or a member of a strata committee attaches instead to the owners corporation.