› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Common Property › Deemed served and proper notice › Current Page
This thread exist mainly on the back of the way the legal profession portray s 76 of the Interpretation Act and s 160 Evidence Act which is essentially the same thing.
Just because the 7 days in those Acts does not exist for a SC notice does not make a SC meeting non compliant, there is another test the notice can pass but no one goes into that.
Based on the half baked legal commentary people like my agent tell people like my SC that the half baked is the law and required. So we can have all owner with their notice with their proper 3 days yet half the SC crying out of order and non compliant. It’s a clown show and nobody is laughing.
Discussion on the deem served time-frames is all for nothing as case law buffs would know the SC doesn’t even need to send a notice let alone worry if it is on time for their decisions to still be valid.
The only thing that matter is what the NSW Court of Appeal say; unless the High Court say otherwise.
The NSWCA have said in the Yau case:
Beazley P (Leeming JA and Emmett AJA agreeing):
(5) Non-compliance with the notice requirements for a meeting of the executive committee specified in the Strata Schemes Management Act 1996, Sch 3, cl 6 does not result in the invalidity of any resolutions passed at such a meeting. [116], [195], [226]
2 Elizabeth Bay Road Pty Limited v The Owners – Strata Plan No 73943 (2014) 88 NSWLR 488; [2014] NSWCA 409; Barron v Potter [1914] 1 Ch 895; Balog v Independent Commission Against Corruption (1991) 169 CLR 625; [1991] HCA 28; Ryan v Kings Cross RSL Club Pty Ltd [1972] 2 NSWLR 79, cited.
Guidelines for those on their best behaviour as Jimmy says.
A wish list as I like to say.
Welcome to strata living for those who think the rules matter.
They mostly don’t matter because there is all too often no consequence for not following them.
If you think must means must in the Strata Act then you are very mistaken about 98% of the time.