Isn’t Cl 64 irrelevant?
After all the work that James (jamezb) wants his O/C to pay for hardly passes the test under 64.1(a), and the costs of the work can be recovered from another person under 64.2; him.
James does own the Common Property windows as part of the O/C “collective”, but that aside, wasn’t his original beef that his O/C was going to use funds collected on the basis of units of entitlement to replace Common Property windows, in circumstances where his Lot only had one (1) of those, where other Lots had many, and where his balcony door and window could only be concurrently replaced at his own cost?
Have I given James and everyone else a headache, or have we actually solved his problem IF he successfully argues a case for his O/C to add to it’s Common Property by taking-over balcony-facing doors and windows?
I think I need a drink (won’t walk through any glass doors though).