Does that really mean that he/she is more disadvantaged than the other owners?
That’s why I suggested they get a ruling from NCAT. We have no idea how much everyone would be disrupted and why he might be no worse off than others. We shouldn’t assume anything – but a mediation or, if need be, a Tribunal ruling would at least hear the arguments
But I think there’s a fundamental principle here – one unlucky owner should not have to bear more than their fair share of costs or disruption because of work that benefits everyone.