Rulings create open slather on body corporates for pet lovers

DOGS or cats in apartments and townhouses usually cause issues with neighbours but a string of recent rulings over body corporate bans has opened the door for pet owners.

A string of rulings in favour of pet owners has found blanket bans against animals in complexes are “invalid” and “unreasonable”.

PET lovers who own units, apartments and townhouses have been given the green light to ignore strict animal bans imposed by bodies corporate.

A string of rulings in favour of pet owners has found blanket bans against animals in complexes are “invalid” and “unreasonable”.

The precedent has spurred people with cats and dogs to openly ignore or challenge committees who refuse to allow pets.

Lawyers have warned it is now “open slather” and have urged bodies corporate to act quickly to impose “reasonable” conditions on pet ownership such as having to formally apply and anti-barking policies.

Many complexes with longstanding No Pet policies are now softening hardline rules as awareness spreads.

Even holiday resorts are altering by-laws to allow pets if people follow an application process and meet conditions limiting the impact on neighbours.

Gold Coast lawyer John Punch, of Short, Punch and Greatorix, said pet lovers had precedent on their side and were using it to their advantage.

Diesel the cattle dog was facing eviction from his Redcliffe apartment.

“The ultimate policeman is the Body Corporate Commissioner’s office and the commissioner’s office has already made decisions which encourages people to believe by-laws banning pets are invalid and can be ignored,” said Mr Punch, who acts for bodies corporate and owners.

“I know of examples where if an owner wishes to have a pet they say ‘Aha, I can ignore that by-law because it can be ruled invalid’.”

In recent cases, the commissioner this month made orders in favour of a King Charles Cavalier Spaniel named Ally at Ocean Plaza apartments on the Gold Coast.

Last month a young professional woman at Ipswich was allowed to keep her cavoodle Chardy, with the adjudicator citing “recent decisions in relation to the keeping of animals in community titles schemes, which are clearly in favour of allowing owners the right to keep pets”.

The commissioner’s office has dealt with 95 pet disputes this financial year and 126 last financial year.

Animal lover Stacy Cuninghame said she cited cases when applying to her body corporate to keep a cat in a two-storey Arana Hills townhouse, which had a ban on pets.

“Because we had individual legal precedents and told them you don’t have the right to have a no pets policy, they understood we knew what we were talking about and said yes,” said Ms Cuninghame.

Dog owner Chris Taylor, who owns a holiday apartment in Caloundra, said her Jack Russell Wheels was now welcome at the complex after a 16-year animal ban was reversed.

“I’d asked previously and been knocked back every time,” she said. “But now there’s a precedent and they can’t just say no.”