Unit title apartment owners can be separately billed for any ‘substantial benefit’ to their apartment following body corporate authorised repairs, regardless of whether they voted in favour or not.
Owners of adjoining apartments on top floor of the Dominion Building in central Wellington unsuccessfully challenged reimbursement of some $140,000 demanded after repairs to their cantilevered balconies were carried out at the same time as roofing remediation.
At issue were changes to the Unit Titles Act in 2010 intended to overcome the then problem of owners letting their individual apartments run down, continually deferring much-needed repairs and maintenance, leaving other apartments at risk.
New rules allow bodies corporate to initiate repairs.
Two top floor owners in the Dominion Building argued they could not be forced to pay for repairs specific to their apartments, part of a seven million dollar roof remediation, even if these repairs happened to benefit them exclusively.
Their balconies were temporarily removed, enabling installation of an external goods lift elevator for the roof remediation.
The Dominion Building is nearly one hundred years old.
A new top floor was added in the 1980s with units 29 and 30 on that floor unusual in having cantilevered balconies hanging in mid-air over land owned by Wellington Council.
Arguably, these balconies form part of body corporate common property, but practically are only available for the exclusive use of each apartment owner.
During the re-roof, balconies being re-attached to units 29 and 30 were repaired, made safe with installation of new decking.
In the High Court, Justice La Hood confirmed a prior District Court ruling that it is irrelevant whether a body corporate or an apartment owner initiates the repair; if work results in a separate substantial benefit for specific apartment owners, they pay.
Dominion Seven Ltd v. Body Corporate 82981 – High Court (24.07.26)
26.206