› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Pets: Furry friends … or fiends? › Dog and cat ban stands says the SC. › Current Page
The response is a little ideal world and, yes, in an ideal world it is a great response.
But; the OC in question has been to mediation before over this and is aware of a current mediation application. They will fight it.
The OC since 2017 has been kept abreast of everything, the initial first instance NCAT matters (Yardy, Roden McCormick and so on), the SC was kept abreast of the NCAT Appeal outcomes in some of those matters and was given the NSWCA Cooper decision the day of the decision. The SC was also aware of the Bill that led to s 137B, the passing of that Bill and the date on which 137B commenced.
The SC (OC) stands firm, with the backing of the majority, that the by-law is still valid.
There was even an NCAT Appeal matter over an assistance dog on the 23<sup>rd</sup> Sept and it seems the OC will lose that matter, potential costs in excess of $10k. The Member (Dept Pres) even said s 137B meant the OC could not remove the dog simply because it was a dog; i.e. the no dogs by-law was not enforceable. The dogs assistance animal status not relevant anymore.
The OC’s representative even denied knowing about the Cooper case.
Yet the OC’s position as expressed at the Appeal Panel hearing was one of every avenue will be explored and scuttlebutt is that no expense will be spared. The OC even threatened, in their submission, to go to the Federal Court over the assistance animal status of the dog in question; not that it matters anymore due to s 137B.
The SC knows everything and willfully ignores it all because they have majority backing and the majority wants no cats or dogs. You can have a goat or a pig or horses, those silly looking llama things, it is a rural strata plan, anything except a cat or dog.
Nothing ‘ideal world’ about a lot of SPs and their SC members, especially here.