Australia, Aug. 16 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on July 15:

1. This appeal concerns a dispute between a lot owner (the Respondent to the appeal) and the Owners Corporation of the Strata Plan constituted by the Appellant.

2. In August last year the Respondent lodged an application in the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Tribunal seeking orders against the Appellant. In brief terms the application alleged that the Appellant had breached its obligations under s 106 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW) (the Strata Act) and that the Appellant should be ordered to engage suitably qualified contractors to carry out remediation works on common property and in particular to carry out "mould remediation in the Respondent's lot". The Respondent also made a claim for compensation under s 106(5) of the Strata Act.

3. The proceedings were heard by the Tribunal on 19 February 2025, when the Appellant made an application for an adjournment upon the basis that it required further time to produce the evidence of an expert. The adjournment application was refused, and the Tribunal went on to consider the Respondent's application. The Tribunal made orders for the Appellant to undertake certain work, more particularly described in the written record of the decision.

4. The Appellant's appeal contends that the Tribunal erred in refusing the adjournment and that, as a result, the Appellant has been denied an opportunity to put its case. The Appellant seeks an order that the current orders requiring it to undertake certain work be set aside and that the Respondent's application be remitted back to the Consumer and Commercial Division for hearing and for the making of directions so as to permit the Appellant to put forward its expert evidence.

The Basic Facts

5. The basic facts relevant to the appeal are not controversial. They are as follows:

1) On 3 September 2024 the Tribunal made directions by which a timetable was imposed upon the parties for the filing and serving of their material in support of or in opposition to the Respondent's application. Subsequently, the timetable was extended.

2) On 29 November 2024 the Respondent served her evidence. This consisted of a report by Endeavour Engineering (John Riad), a report by Forensic Engineering Australia and a report on mould by SLR Consulting. By the amended timetable the Appellant had until 17 January 2025 to file and serve its evidence.

3) By email of 2 December 2024, the Appellant's solicitor informed the Respondent's solicitor that he (the Appellant's solicitor) was liaising with a number of experts as to their availability to carry out an inspection of the Respondent's lot. He asked whether the Respondent could provide a range of dates over "the next 2-3 weeks" when an inspection of the Respondent's lot would be possible.

4) The Respondent's solicitor replied on the same day (2 December 2024) by email stating that the Respondent would provide access to her lot "on Wednesday, Thursday and/or Friday this week". The email further stated that the Respondent would be overseas for six weeks from 9 December 2024 and that access can be "facilitated" upon the Respondent's return to Australia from 3 February 2025 onwards.

5) On 6 December 2024 an expert engaged by the Appellant conducted an inspection of the Respondent's lot. The expert was Mr Carlo Perri of CRF Constructions. The Appellant did not ultimately rely on any evidence from Mr Perri.

6) On 9 December 2024 the Tribunal issued a Notice of Hearing advising the parties that the Respondent's application was listed to be heard on 19 February 2025.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/198077535ca51a4dc908764d)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.