#14003
Cathy Sherry
Flatchatter

    There is no case law specifically on point that I can find Jimmy but I think the answer is that an owner does not have to seek written permission from the OC if nets are for the safety of children.  Lot owners can just install them, (if there are by-laws like model by-law 5). Should an OC seek an order to have them removed, they may be on shaky ground.  They could only do so if the nets are not in keeping with the appearance of the building, were not competently installed, were a fire or safety risk.

    There is case law holding that an OC which refused to consent to the installation of roller shutters to keep out heat and light was behaving unreasonably by claiming it was not in keeping with the building:

    Owners Corporation SP30403 v Landale, Christine [1999] NSWSSB 17 (2 March
    1999)

    Roller shutters are more solid than nets and heat and light are less of a problem than a child falling from a balcony, so I would suggest that arguing nets can never be in keeping with the facade of a building is untenable.  If roller shutters can be, nets can be too.
     

    In relation to people's initial comments about parents not being forced to live in properties that are dangerous to children, it can equally be said that other owners are not forced to live in properties where they share common property with others. If you live in strata, you accept that you cannot have your own way about everything, including the look of the facade of the building. If we are balancing up a “right” to have certain visual aesthetic and a “right” to protect your child's life, my instinct is that the former should be compromised, not the latter.  The existence of an exception in model by-law 5 for children's safety suggests that the legislature clearly intended children's safety to override the general provision that changes to common property have to be approved.  Sounds pretty rational to me.