Search results

In 1984, when a Government committee under the chairmanship of Mr E. G. Nugee QC was set up to look into the problems of management of privately owned blocks of flats (see Property Management Vol 5 No 2), both the National Consumer Council and the Building Societies Association, in their findings submitted to the committee, advocated the adoption of the Australian strata title system to replace the long leasehold. More recently, the Law Commission has called for the creation of a ‘commonhold’ system of ownership similar to the condominium concept in the United States and the strata title system in Australia. This paper presents the concept of strata titles as a system of flat ownership and management. The term ‘flat’ here is not confined to that for residential occupation but has a wider application extending to ‘airspace’. The paper examines the formation of a strata scheme, the legal and planning implications of ownership and, finally, the framework of operation.

In the face of Singapore's land scarcity problem, there is an increasing prevalence of strata‐titled developments providing private housing in Singapore. This paper considers the awareness in certain quarters of certain fundamental aspects of this unique form of property ownership. The particular aspect which this paper considers is the understanding and interpretation of the term “common property” among two important groups of people. The first group comprises those who purchase strata title properties – they are referred to as “subsidiary proprietors”. The second group comprises “managing agents” (MAs), who may be delegated this task of professionally managing and maintaining the strata‐titled development. The findings of a survey are that their understanding of this fundamental term is inadequate. Based on these findings, the paper concludes with recommendations for improving the level of professionalism among MAs through licensing and courses for continuing professional development. This will bode well for the overall state of strata‐titled developments which are not only here to stay, but are expected to increase in number in Singapore.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the nature and extent of psychosocial need fulfillment experienced by resident strata title owners and to shed light on factors that detract from residents’ lived experience in the strata title context.

An interview schedule that draws on theories of psychosocial need fulfillment was developed. In total, 16 home owners and three strata title managers were interviewed. Interviewees were sourced from three master planned communities located in South East Queensland, Australia.

The majority of owners reported high levels of need fulfillment and neighbourhood satisfaction. Primary sources of dissatisfaction appeared to be related to body corporate committee governance issues.

The study's findings are subject to the widely acknowledged limitations of small sample based interview research and the study's qualitative orientation signifies that it suffers from the compromised generalisability and potential of selective and subjective reporting of observations.

The findings suggest a need for greater societal appreciation of factors associated with living in a strata titled community. Recommendations are provided for facilitating the transition to strata title living and reducing sources of resident dissatisfaction.

The paper uniquely explores residential satisfaction from a psychosocial needs perspective. There is a paucity of related research reported in the literature.

From 1967, responsibility for the maintenance and management of common property in strata developments in Singapore was borne by single‐tier management corporations. However from 2005, through the concepts of multi‐tier management corporations and limited common property, new legislation made sweeping changes to the way in which common property can be managed. This paper aims to discuss the present situation

First, the problems inherent in the existing system of single‐tier management corporations for strata property management until 2005 are examined. This provides a backdrop for a discussion of the solutions presented by new legislation in the form of “two/multi‐tier” management corporations.

The study reveals that while the multi‐tier system could alleviate some of the problems existing under the single‐tier management corporation system, other problems could arise; these include increased operational costs, finding sufficient volunteers for the multi‐tier management corporations, and increased potential for conflict.

There are practical implications for various parties including subsidiary proprietors, management corporations, developers and managing agents. Developers and property owners now have certain flexibilities that were not available under the single‐tier system. Evaluation of the potential problems can result in greater efficiency and cost savings.

While this paper is of general interest to all types of strata developments, it is of particular relevance to mixed‐use developments, which may benefit from multi‐tier management corporations. The paper draws on the experiences of other jurisdictions, which have implemented similar systems and introduced measures to minimize some potential problems.

High-density development requires large land parcels, but fragmented land ownership can impede redevelopment. While earlier compact city development in Sydney occurred on large-scale brownfield sites, redeveloping and re-amalgamating older strata-titled properties is now integral to further densification. The purpose of this study is to examine collective sales activity in one Sydney suburb where multiple strata-titled redevelopments and re-amalgamations have been attempted. The authors explore how owners navigate the process of selling collectively, focusing on their experience of legislation introduced to facilitate this process, the Strata Schemes Development Act 2015 [New South Wales (NSW)].

By reviewing sales listings, development applications and media coverage, and interviewing owners, lawyers and estate agents, the authors map out collective sale activity in a case study area in Sydney’s northwest.

Strata collective sales are slow and difficult to complete, even when planning and market drivers align. Owners find the Strata Scheme Development Act 2015 (NSW) difficult to navigate and it has not prevented strategic blocking attempts by competing developers. The long timelines required to organise collective sales can result in failure if the market shifts in the interim. Nonetheless, owners remain interested in selling collectively.

This case study is important for understanding the barriers to redevelopment to achieve a more compact city. It highlights lessons for other jurisdictions considering similar legislative changes. It also suggests that legislative change alone is insufficient to resolve the planning challenges created by hyper-fragmentation of land through strata-title development.

This study aims to enlighten strata property owners about the importance of choosing the appropriate vehicle for the management of the common property in their strata development.

The research methodology employed for this inquiry is a case study of two residential strata‐titled properties. The two were selected on the basis that, although they share certain similar characteristics including age, tenure and locational attributes, each employs different systems of property management. Data were gathered mainly through interviews with the Property Managers and Chairs of the Management Council. Interviews were also carried out with professionals in the real estate industry specializing in property and facilities management.

The study reveals the various factors of which Management Corporations should be mindful when deciding what form of property management vehicle to use. Careful consideration of these factors will result in a decision that not only is cost‐effective, but also provides greater efficiency in the management and maintenance of the strata titled development.

Careful consideration of the factors revealed in the findings can result in a decision by the Management Corporation, which is cost‐effective. Evaluation of the factors will also result in greater efficiency in the management and maintenance of common property in the strata titled development.

This is an up‐to‐date comparison of two property management systems available to strata developments, in the context of the Singapore Land Titles (Strata) Act, which is based on New South Wales' legislation. The information is useful for strata owners and Management Councils in other jurisdictions in that it provides pointers on the choice of a property management system.

Provides some background to new proposals in the UK to introduce legislation which would give existing long leaseholders in interdependent properties the collective right to purchase the freehold interest. Sets out to examine the management structure of commonhold properties, with particular emphasis on the dynamics of collective management, in three countries where it is well established: Australia, France and the USA.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the causes, the nature and the extent of unneighbourly relations between neighbours living in small multi-owned residential buildings (MOBs, sometimes called strata) in Australian cities, and the effect of these relations on the health and wellbeing of residents. The impact of neighbour relations and conflicts on residents' health and wellbeing has not been explored before in the context of small MOBs in Australia (under 12 units).

The research involved an analysis of secondary data on common problems experienced in MOBs between neighbours, in-depth face-to-face interviews with twenty-six residents and interviews with five managers of management agencies in metropolitan Melbourne (Victoria) and Adelaide (South Australia), Australia.

When strata processes and management worked well residents were positive about living in such an arrangement. However, when the strata group was less harmonious residents reported that it impacted negatively on their health and wellbeing.

The study's findings are subject to the widely acknowledged limitations of small sample-based interview research. Findings indicate that there is a need to explore the benefits and disadvantages of living in small multi-owned residential buildings in Australia on a larger scale.

There are three policy implications from the findings: a need for better education of prospective buyers regarding the nature of strata living; tighter regulation of rules for small multi-owned apartment buildings is required, (in a similar way to how the regulations operate in large apartment buildings); and a need to include private rental tenants living in strata in the everyday life around the management of the building.

The impact of neighbourly relations and conflicts on the health and wellbeing of residents living in MOBs, particularly small ones, has not been studied adequately, as current research focuses on large apartment buildings. This research addresses a gap in the literature in the study of small living arrangements (town houses, apartment buildings, terraces), with 12 or less apartments, with a focus on residents' health and wellbeing.

This study aims to investigate Australian civil tribunal decisions to ascertain compliance with decisional quality standards in Australian law, with a particular focus on strata and community title cases.

An orthodox doctrinal legal analysis and assessment of cases and tribunal policies was adopted. All Australian jurisdictions were surveyed, including federal, state and territory jurisdictions. The case law in each jurisdiction was screened to identify whether the principles applicable to decisional quality were engaged and then analysed as to the extent of that engagement.

Where a party presents a substantial, clearly particularised argument relying upon established facts, tribunals are obliged to address those facts and the arguments by way of an active intellectual process. However, appellate decisions disclose a degree of deference not often accorded to judicial officers, and there is a need for a more disciplined approach to ascertain whether any errors have been made by a tribunal lie on the critical path to the decision. As strata and community title disputes become more complex, the importance of decisional quality standards can only increase.

Up to date as of 1 March 2023.

The present position would appear to be that where a party presents a substantial, clearly particularised argument relying upon established facts, a tribunal must address its mind to those facts and the arguments by way of an active intellectual process. The requirement is limited to circumstances prescribed by a statute and factual and legal issues which are necessary to be determined in order for the tribunal to be satisfied as to circumstances prescribed by a statute. However, where the errors are not gross and plainly obvious, appeals from defective tribunal decisions are unlikely to succeed. There is a degree of deference not often accorded to judicial officers. That deference is unfortunate when tribunals are allocated jurisdiction over what quite often are significant property disputes.

The impact on community living of uncorrected poor quality tribunal decisions can be immense, depending on the degree of error. For example, water ingress into people’s homes might remain unremedied for many years, as, for example, occurred in the Marinko case.

The research and analysis is entirely original. A search of journals and textbooks did not identify any prior analysis, at least in the Australian context, relating to decisional quality standards of tribunals.

The purpose of this paper is to present a case study of the legislative creation of high rise and master planned communities to provide a common basis for future discussions, research and international comparison in the field.

The case study addresses relevant legislation in the Australian state of New South Wales. This has been a model for that in other jurisdictions, including Singapore, the UK and the Dubai International Financial Centre. The legal terms and their significance are discussed in a way that is comprehensible to both lawyers and non‐lawyers.

The legislation is shown to have achieved a range of outcomes that are not possible in ordinary Anglo‐Australian property law. For example, it has created governing “bodies corporate” which regulate communities with private by‐laws and facilitates the continued enforcement of detailed architectural guidelines imposing a master plan.

The research describes the legal framework for the creation of communities in a single jurisdiction. More research is needed on the specific way that legal structures hinder or promote satisfactory community living in this and in other jurisdictions.

The paper will aid discussions between a range of academics and practitioners working on high rise and master planned communities. It will assist communication between lawyers and non‐lawyers, providing a clear description of the significance of legislation in the creation of communities. It will facilitate transnational discussion, as differences in legal systems and inconsistent terminology are a barrier to effective communication and common understanding.