"Legal Action", All those in Favour say "Why"

15 July 13

I was recently involved in a New South Wales matter where an Executive Committee had received extensive legal advice from a lawyer regarding the termination of a Caretaking Agreement for a building with close to 200 lots. The Executive Committee then acted upon this advice and sought to terminate the Caretaking Agreement at a General Meeting. At that stage, the Executive Committee had not sought the approval of the owners at a General Meeting to initiate the legal action and it was clear they had already incurred well over $13,000.00 in legal fees with the lawyer.

In New South Wales, the strata legislation does not permit the Executive Committee to approve the initiation of legal action if the legal fees for that action will cost more than $12,500.00 or $1,000.00 per lot (whichever is lesser), without first receiving the approval of the Owners Corporation at a General Meeting. When I advised the Executive Committee of my concerns that the legal action they had taken was unauthorised, the Executive Committee and the lawyer argued that a scope for “preliminary work” had been provided and authorised by the Executive Committee for work which was less than the $12,500.00 threshold. This appeared to be an interesting interpretation of the facts to say the least.

In this instance the termination of the Caretaking Agreement subsequently went before a Consumer, Trader & Tenancy Tribunal (CTTT) adjudicator and the issue of the cost of the legal advice was raised. The Executive Committee were very fortunate that the legal system moves with the spritely grace of a snail as the adjudicator did not end up reviewing the issue before the Executive Committee had been able to call an Extraordinary General Meeting and retrospectively approve the taking of legal action above the $12,500.00 threshold. With the retrospective approval of the Owners Corporation now recorded, the adjudicator did not feel the need to overturn the Owners Corporation’s decision and the unauthorised action taken by the Executive Committee was politely overlooked.

If the Owners Corporation had not retrospectively approved the costs, it is possible the members of the Executive Committee could have been personally liable for the unapproved amount. What should an Executive Committee do to avoid finding themselves in a situation like this?

An Executive Committee should only approve the taking of a legal action that is within the legal fee threshold set by section 80D of the Strata Schemes Management Act 1996 and the corresponding regulations. Many legal matters can go well over the threshold for legal costs and because of this there must be a practical way for the Executive Committee to begin legal actions without resorting to calling a General Meeting every time.

The solution is to review the legal matter the Owners Corporation needs assistance with and specifically identify the first legal action the Owners Corporation needs to take. If the first action is below the legal fee threshold the Executive Committee will have the authority to begin the legal action without needing to call a General Meeting.

In the example above, the Executive Committee should have initially sought a scope for preliminary advice, which it would have had the authority to authorise, and then sought a scope for further legal actions (such as drafting a breach notice) to be authorised by the Owners Corporation at a General Meeting. This way the Executive Committee can get initial legal advice before bringing the matter to the entire Owners Corporation unnecessarily.

This approach was recently supported by the findings of the New South Wales Supreme Court in the case of Madden v The Owners – Strata Plan No. 64970. In the Madden case, the Owners Corporation lawyer provided an initial costs estimate to the Executive Committee of $400.00-$1,000.00 for legal services to obtain a default judgment in the Owners Corporation’s matter. The matter eventually led to approximately $35,000.00 in legal fees. It was argued in the case that the Executive Committee never had the authority to initiate the legal matter as the eventual costs were well above the threshold.

The Court held that the threshold only applied to the first legal action the Owners Corporation were seeking, which was in this case the seeking of a default judgement. This meant that as long as any subsequent legal actions taken by the Owners Corporation on the same matter that would take the costs above the threshold were approved at a General Meeting they would be appropriately authorised.

This Supreme Court judgement makes it clear that the Executive Committee or Strata Manager of a building has the ability to initiate urgent legal action when the cost of that action is below the threshold without waiting for the approval of the Owners Corporation at a General Meeting.


Contact Us Now

Phone:+ 61 7 5552 6666
Fax:+ 61 7 5528 0955
Address:Level 2, 17 Welch St Southport, Qld, 4215
Postal:PO Box 1876
Southport 4215



Most Popular Articles

Management Rights News

Number of news items returned: 1 to 15 records of 111

The Different Types of Caretaking Agreements

17 November 2014


 Essentially, there are three types of caretaking agreements in the marketplace: “Do” agreements; “Supervisory” agreements; Hybrid “Do” and “Supervisory” agreements. “Do” Agreements A “Do” agreement ...

Unit Entitlement in NSW

11 February 2013


The issue of unit entitlement was recently looked at again as part of the Department of Fair Trading’s Discussion Paper ...


16 July 2015


This month, we continue our examination of various clauses within caretaking and letting agreements and the important considerations to be ...

Is it Time to Change the Management Rights Model?

13 May 2013


I think the time is right for the management rights industry to explore the creation of a new model. I ...

What Managers Need to know about the NSW Child Window Safety Devices Act 2013

17 January 2014


Resident building managers have general obligations under their Caretaking Agreements to assist Owners Corporations with building and compliance issues. Managers ...

Be Careful with your Proxies!

03 October 2013


In June this year, I wrote an article headed “Proxy Farming”, which set out the relevant restrictions on caretakers using ...

Short-Term Letting, Occupancy Limits And Tenant Representatives In NSW Strata

25 July 2017


Occupancy Limits By-laws in NSW may limit the number of adult residents in a lot. The limit however cannot be fewer ...

The Law Relating to Management Rights in Queensland

14 June 2010


This article looks at the legislation in Queensland dealing with the constraints and obligations imposed on developers whilst they control ...

Duty Bound or Duty Free - Do you know what Your Duties Are?

23 September 2013


The day-to-day care and maintenance of your resort facilities and communal areas is essential to its ongoing performance and success. ...

Caretaking and Letting Agreement Essentials Part 1

03 September 2014


We regularly prepare caretaking and letting agreements for new developments. However, it has become increasingly common for us to be ...

For Your Eyes Only!

15 April 2013


Information is a commodity and for many, information is power. As you would most likely know from personal experience, the right ...

Owners Corporation Insurance - How do we Stop the Spiraling Costs?

12 August 2013


In NSW, all strata schemes are required to be insured for the full replacement value, as well as public liability ...

Proxy Farming

10 June 2013


It is often stated that Strata and Community Schemes represent the “fourth tier of Government” and, as such, voting (either ...

"Legal Action", All those in Favour say "Why"

15 July 2013


I was recently involved in a New South Wales matter where an Executive Committee had received extensive legal advice from ...

Not Getting the Fundamentals Right

15 October 2013


A recent decision of the NSW Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal (CTTT) has highlighted the importance of ensuring that the ...