People might want to check with the Supreme Court about owners “must” get a notice.
Most the musts in the Act are not an imperative. They are more a should than a must.
- Similar reasoning is in my view applicable to the “must” provisions of clause 6 of Schedule 3. This reasoning supports the conclusion that the provisions regulate the exercise of powers by the EC and that compliance with them is not a necessary condition for the existence of power on the part of the EC.
The Owners Strata Plan No 57164 v Yau [2016] NSWSC 1056
Sch 3 cl 6 is from the 1996 Act but it is pretty much the same as the current version SC meeting notice provision, i.e. Sch 2 cl 4 (SSM Act 2015)
Bottom line is the Supreme Court says the existence of power (to make a decision) still exists even if you don’t get a notice.
I don’t make the rules I just mock those who make a mockery of them.
Good one Supreme Court.
Justice Rowan Darke has since retired.
I for one will not miss him with decisions like that.