› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Living in strata › Quorum present not all financial › Current Page
wombat said:
I recall someone on this forum saying that the CTTT is not a “real” jurisdiction.
That was me. I say that because CTTT outcomes do not set precedent nor do they constitute persuasive argument. Each outcome is its own result.
There is one case by Senior Member Balding, now a Deputy Chair, where she quotes two different former cases that have great similarity to the one she was dealing with. She notes the decisions in the other matters are all over the place (my words, not hers). One of the two referenced cases gave the requested orders; the other dismissed the matter – a complete farce if s3(d) of the CTTT Act means anything.
You might find it interesting that I was recently trying to have a Members performance reviewed under Schedule 3 of the CTTT Act but as the Member was acting as an Adjudicator the CTTT Chair felt the CTTT Act did not apply and as such declined to refer the complaint to the review panel.
Adjudicator are Adjudicators and not Members for the purpose of the Schedule 3 of the CTTT Act ?????
That is interesting because it should follow that s83 of the CTTT Act would also not apply when a Member is acting as an Adjudicator.