Part 15 published on 01/08/06
Equal sharing of common expenses not oppressive
Two Strata Plans were amalgamated. Prior to amalgamation, each of the Strata lots had an equal unit entitlement of one. Following amalgamation, this equal sharing was continued. However, there were significant differences in the habitable square areas between the Strata lots in the two amalgamated Strata Plans.
Some of the Strata owners petitioned for an order that the contribution to the common expenses should be based upon the habitable square area of each Strata lot. The Court dismissed the petition, for the following reasons:
a. Section 246 (7) of the Strata Property Act did not apply because the unit entitlements had not been calculated on the basis of habitable area. (If the unit entitlements had been calculated on the basis of habitable area, any inaccuracy could be corrected under that section).
b. The Court was not satisfied that equal sharing was “significantly unfair”.