For those who like the contrasts found in legal cases consider the harsh unconscionable and oppressive in Cooper and also in Roden and contrast them with the Appeal Panels work in The Owners – Strata Plan No 91157 v Yoolee Holdings Pty Ltd Limited; where the Member argued:
(1) Does the by-law provide for unnecessary or unreasonable differential treatment between lot owners or occupiers?
(2) Does an aggrieved lot owner have a reasonable expectation (in the circumstances of the particular case) that any restriction(s) would not be required or imposed?
(3) Does the by-law provide for reasonable exceptions?
(4) Does the by-law provide a “complete embargo” as found in John Maait Properties?
(5) Is it appropriate that an owners corporation establish some control and is the level of control appropriate?
(6) Does the by-law include provision for consideration of individual needs which may not be necessary in relation to the majority of owners or occupiers?
(7) Does the by-law allow particular works or benefits but at an unreasonable cost?
(8) In considering each of the above factors (and any other factors which may suggest themselves), does the by-law include that element of extremity necessary to meet the high standard set by s. 139
I have edited this and cut it back a lot because I’m not sure that posting huge chunks of legal verdicts improves the understanding of these issues. Most people won’t read very far into these documents.
Make your point, by all means quote a line or two, and then please provide a link to the document you’re quoting. But I think great long screeds of detailed copied and pasted material turns the vast majority of people off and halts discussion in its tracks (as you can see right here). – JimmyT