That is comforting thank you. So, the CTTT can simply throw out a By-Law such as this? That would be good, but controversial. I was also wondering about the bit in the By-Law which says “The proprietors for the time being of each lot…”, wondering if that implies when a lot is sold or let, the By-Law is no longer valid. I didn’t mention currently half the ten units with spaces are let and half owned. Also some sub-letting of these spaces occurs for cash which is probably against the ‘rules’.
The phrase ‘for the time being’ means ‘at any time’. This is a standard phrase which means parking space was allocated to whoever is the proprietor of the unit at any particular instant. So, at the moment the unit changes hands the new unit owner gets the parking space. It is a way to say the allocation is to a person but the person is defined as whoever it is that owns that unit at any moment. Put another way it is a way to make the allocation run with the unit even though the Act may have required an allocation to a person.
We did exact this in order to have every unit allocated a covered parking space in our development and have the arrangement stick with the unit as it changes hands.
On the matter of having the bylaw require an unopposed resolution to be rescinded, that sounds unlikely to be valid. A bylaw would only have effect (IE be valid) to the extent that it is not inconsistent with the Act. If the Act says an bylaw can be rescinded by a special resolution (that is what it is in the ACT, not sure for NSW) then what the Act says goes.
Certainly in the ACT our tribunal can overturn a bylaw. If a resolution to overturn it is unsuccessful the motion can be given effect on the grounds that the opposition was unreasonable. I would expect NSW to have a similar provision.