This article discusses how majority rule determines decisions about the removal of a common property tree in Qld strata schemes.
Question: Can an owner insist on removing a tree that other owners want to keep for privacy and shade?
We live in a 17-lot strata, and our ground-floor lot has exclusive use of the outdoor area and garden. A tall palm tree on the boundary provides privacy between our building and the neighbouring block. One owner on level 3 wants the palm removed, claiming it restricts his water view. The palm was there when he bought the apartment three years ago. It’s 20 metres from his unit and doesn’t block his main view, which is 180 degrees from his front balcony. Other owners want to keep the tree because it offers privacy and shade. Can this owner ignore the wishes of the majority and have the palm removed?
Answer: If you can create the circumstances to have a clear majority decision made, you settle the issue one way or the other.
The first thing to determine is who owns the tree? In other words, whose land is the tree on?
If the tree is on private land or in an exclusive use area, you need to negotiate with that owner. If it is shared between you and the neighbour, they may have a say in the matter. However, for the sake of argument, let’s assume it is on body corporate property.
In that case, decisions over the maintenance and management of the tree will most likely be made by a majority decision of the committee. If the cost of removal was sufficiently high, the matter could be referred to all owners at a general meeting.
The level three owner is entitled to make a request to the body corporate to remove the tree. If a majority of the committee agrees, the tree could be removed. Equally, if a majority disagree, the tree stays in place. You should have at least three committee members, and they must act reasonably, considering the needs of the whole body corporate in their decisions. So, there should be a balance against one person railroading something they want through.
In practice, of course, it doesn’t always work out this way. Some people have dominant personalities and are very successful at pushing things to get their own way. That can be tricky. You may need to speak to the other owners and ensure you have robust committee representation.
In the short term, perhaps you could submit a committee motion to consider the matter. The motion could state that the tree not be removed. Upon receipt, the committee has six weeks to vote on the proposal. This process would confirm that the majority agreed. If you wanted to be doubly sure, you could perhaps submit a similar motion to the next general meeting so all owners could vote on the matter. At the end of the day, the majority decision rules. If you can create the circumstances to have a clear majority decision made, you settle the issue one way or the other.
William Marquand
Tower Body Corporate
E: willmarquand@towerbodycorporate.com.au
P: 07 5609 4924
This post appears in Strata News #768.
Have a question or something to add to the article? Leave a comment below.
Read next:
- QLD: Q&A Retrospective approval of an unapproved fence on common property
- QLD: Q&A Responsibility to Repair Common Property and Defects
- QLD: Q&A Renovations, Altering Common Property and Changing the Appearance of the Lot
Visit our Maintenance and Common Property OR Strata Legislation QLD.
Looking for strata information concerning your state? For state-specific strata information, take a look here.
After a free PDF of this article? Log into your existing LookUpStrata Account to download the printable file. Not a member? Simple – join for free on our Registration page.
Leave a Reply