The affected lot owner claimed $9,494.00 in damages from the OC. But lost. They could not establish the OC’s negligence or failure to maintain its common property …
From reading the finding, the was no ruling against the owners corp as it was obvious that someone else was at fault, not the Owners Corp. Indeed, the quoted section of the Water Act said: “the person who caused the flow is liable to pay damages to that other person in respect of that injury, damage or loss.”
Obviously the owners corp had not stuffed the pipes with kitty litter and disposable nappies (as had happened here) and the Tribunal couldn’t establish who had. The plaintiff in this case was seeking damages from the wrong body.
The ruling doesn’t say what has been argued here previously, that the OC would not have been liable if, say, the pipe had ruptured, causing the flood. It’s a false equivalence.