• Creator
  • #58391

    Our apartment building has not been pet friendly, though with bated breath, knew that may not last. Unfortunately now the precedent has been set. . We understand the new regs. put the onus back onto the resident, But to be fair to all, has consideration been given to buildings like ours (28 Lots), who don’ t want to be unreasonable but don’t want to be in a situation where at least 1/2 the los have a dog.

    Why can’t the O C be allowed to set a limit? After all, we live in a world where limits/ quotas are part of every day life. And you wait until the next available seat, property, opportunity becomes available.

    Our SC doesn’t see that as harsh, but as fair…being reasonable to all. ( we did have almost 99% majority for no pets bylaw, ). There must be a sensible solution to this problem.

    As a matter of interest, is the no pets ban on any agenda to be revisited? Understand landlords can refuse a pet in , thank goodness that ruling still stands

Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
  • #58426

    For many people this is a very emotional issue – on both sides.

    Certain people are not comfortable with being around animals. And other people consider their pets as children.

    But consider this. Should the OC create a bylaw to ban children? Whilst for some residents this is tempting, the reality is that bringing up children is a fundamental right, not to be interfered with by any person or court.
    So what if we reset our paradigm to say, all pets are beautiful creatures, until proven otherwise. Once one accepts that, it should become easier to respect the need of others to keep pets in strata.

    If one reads the new laws, anyone can petition the tribunal  to remove a disruptive animal.

    Lets give the animals the benefit of the doubt before casting them all as evil.




    Should the OC create a bylaw to ban children? Whilst for some residents this is tempting, the reality is that bringing up children is a fundamental right, not to be interfered with by any person or court.

    Sorry, but that’s a bit of a spurious argument since strata law in mosts states specifically says you can’t create by-laws to ban children.

    Right now the law in NSW defaults in favour of pets, although existing “no pets” by-laws may still have to be challenged at NCAT.

    I’m sure we will soon see by-laws that allow pets provided no one in the block can present a valid medical cerificate proving that the presence of animals in the building would do them physical or mental harm. That’ll put the cat among the cavoodles.


    The appeal judgement in the Cooper case will be remembered well into the future. In my opinion, and I am just a bush lawyer, it’s principles extend far further than just pets. Watch this space.

    What the judgement did say was that a man’s home is his castle. It raised a persons right to do what they pleased in their lot above the ability of OC to regulate this via by-laws.

    The OC may enact by-laws that place certain reasonable restrictions on an owner of a pet. And I am certain that some buildings will try and make It hard for pet owners. But in my opinion these by-laws are likely to fail.

    The wording of the judgement was very clear and was extensive in blocking out the counter arguments.

    Pet owners should be thankful that Jackie Cooper had a large enough pocket to take the matter as far as she did. It will likewise require OC and pet owners to have the determination and money to argue against having pets in strata.


    The issue of pets has numerous issues.  The following is not meant as an anti pet rant.

    Certainly the laws have veered towards making it harder for strata to prohibit pets.  However both owner occupiers and owner landlords have what I believe are sometimes reasonable and valid concerns.  Those concerns aren’t always medical.

    Once permission is granted, in practice it is very difficult to get some wayward animals out.  Gathering the evidence is often nigh on impossible: (are you sure it was my dog? my Mrs XXX overreacted my dog wasn’t threatening/intruding, any animal could have done that, maybe a stray off the street) .  Enforcing eviction often equally difficult: after a lengthy and costly process  a promise to not offend again and plead that the animal is like family often succeeds.

    For occupiers, often the keeping of pets does result in denying them ‘the quiet enjoyment’ of their unit but also common property.

    For owner landlords, the damage to their property often isn’t covered by any bond and some damage not detected till the next tenant complains.

Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.