You can apply for a ruling at NCAT under section 232 if the strata committee has failed to respond within two months or has responded unfavourably within that period.
The other respondents are right in saying that you have put yourself at a disadvantage by getting the pet before you got approval but you could respond that the SC’s failure to reply made you think it was OK.
Regarding the proposed by-law there is a stack of evidence that restricting pets lowers the value of properties, if only because it removes 30 percent of potential purchasers and tenants.
Also, the law says that no by-law can be “harsh, unconscionable or oppressive.” A by-law that banned pets in a building that already had them would probably fall into that particular pothole.
Once you have sorted out your own position, you would be well advised to let other owners know of the potential problems with a no-pets by-law – it could be very expensive for all owners even trying to get one in place.
Finally, I have never heard of a specialist strata pets lawyer – but the first legal eagle to put that on their shingle will make a motza.