Not Every Common Property Safety Hazard Needs Fixing

Ridis v Strata Plan 10308 [2005] NSWCA 246

GoStrata’s CaseWatch is a short, sharp and easy-to-understand review of important and interesting Court and Tribunal decisions affecting Australian strata title stakeholders.

---

Quick Read

This 2005 NSW Court of Appeal decision is about an older Bellevue Hill strata building’s responsibility and liability for a serious injury when the front door glass shattered.  The original front door glass was annealed, rather than safety glass, but was in good condition and the strata building had never been advised there was any danger from it. So, the primary issue was whether a strata building’s common property obligations extended to inspect for safety risks and upgrading the common property to address risks. The 3 judges had different views but ultimately decided by a 2/3 majority that unknown risks did not need addressing with upgrades in strata buildings.  So, since the front door glass risk in this strata building was unknown, it did not have to hire an expert to assess the possible danger and to change the glass. It’s a rare situation where Courts have reduced the extent of common property duties for strata buildings and excluded positive obligations to inspect for unknown dangers.   But those circumstances are very limited.

---

Implications

The key implications of this strata case are as follows.

• Strata building obligations for common property maintenance, repair and replacement under s 62 are limited.

• In general, the obligations are the same as for occupiers under negligence laws.

• Safety considerations are an important feature of those obligations.

• Common property obligations can include routine monitoring, although the judges did not agree about when they arose.