3 Feb 2021
The court found the buildings were damaged and the proposed single, detailed remedial scheme had broad owner support, was sufficiently detailed, fair in its allocation of costs by utility interest, and appropriate under s 74 Unit Titles Act 2010; accordingly the court made an order settling the scheme and ancillary orders to give effect to it.
11 Aug 2017
The Court was satisfied that the decks suffered significant weathertightness damage triggering s74, that a court‑settled scheme was necessary and in the best interests of unit owners, that adequate service had been effected pursuant to subsequent Court directions, and that the proposed, detailed scheme (with a limited and sensible departure from the Act to levy repairs on utility interest) fairly balanced owners' interests; accordingly the Court approved and settled the scheme, subject to a clarifying amendment to clause 17.2 preserving both arbitration and leave to apply to the Court.
16 Nov 2009
The scheme was approved because it was carefully developed on expert advice, democratically considered and approved by proprietors, necessary to remediate serious defects where no viable third‑party contributors existed, and the Court's wide discretionary power under s48 permits approval; substituted service on Mr Leslie was sufficient but the order implementing the scheme is stayed for 14 days to allow him to apply to set aside or vary orders.