Baker v The Owners – Strata Plan No. 9348 [2024] NSWCATAP 180

Baker v The Owners – Strata Plan No. 9348 [2024] NSWCATAP 180

Leave to appeal was refused and the appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to establish any error of law or basis for granting leave. The Tribunal at first instance had not made an order for remedial works due to lack of sufficient evidence to formulate an order and the discretionary decision was reasonably made without error of principle, taking into account relevant factors. There was no substantial miscarriage of justice or clear error justifying leave to appeal.

Parties
Appellant: Myrtle Herbert William Baker; Respondent: The Owners – Strata Plan No. 9348
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Panel Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Appeals, Duty to Maintain and Repair Common Property, Exercise of Discretion, Leave to Appeal
Strata Law Civil Procedure Appeals Duty to Maintain and Repair Common Property Exercise of Discretion Leave to Appeal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Myrtle Herbert William Baker

Appellant

The Owners – Strata Plan No. 9348

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Panel Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal erred in refusing to order work to repair common property balcony under s 106 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the first instance decision was fair and equitable or against the weight of the evidence
  3. 3 Whether leave to appeal should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused and the appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to establish any error of law or basis for granting leave. The Tribunal at first instance had not made an order for remedial works due to lack of sufficient evidence to formulate an order and the discretionary decision was reasonably made without error of principle, taking into account relevant factors. There was no substantial miscarriage of justice or clear error justifying leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is refused.
  • The appeal is dismissed.