Gibbons, T N (2013) Management agreements in multi-unit housing developments: A case study in regulation and remedies. International Journal of Law in the Built Environment, 5(3), pp. 207-221. ISSN 17561469
Abstract
Purpose: This paper applies existing theoretical models on management agreements for multi-unit housing to a particular legislative provision and its application in a decided case. It then critiques that decision and makes recommendations for policymakers based on the application and scope of the provision. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach: A socio-legal approach is taken, based on a case study of a statutory provision discussed in a decided case. Findings: This paper identifies new phenomena in relation to management agreements for multi-unit housing and makes recommendations for policymakers based on the case study. These recommendations relate to the wording of similar statutory provisions and to developers' duties to future owners. Research limitations/implications: The case study is limited to a single legislative provision and single decided case, though some references are made to overseas jurisdictions. Practical implications: The findings will help guide policymakers in other jurisdictions. Originality/value: Through extending existing models relating to body corporate management agreements and "developer abuse" to a case study relating to legislative reform, this paper shows the usefulness and limitations of a particular type of reform. This will assist those applying existing models to other jurisdictions and also provide guidance for policymakers.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | management rights; multi-unit housing; property management; unit titles |
| Index terms: | critique, owner, case study, agreements, property management, jurisdiction, housing development, housing, duty, regulation, methodology |
| Subjects: | legal systems, real estate economics, contract formation, contractual role, construction type, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, political science, sociology, research methods |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Legal Issues, Contract Administration, Research Practice, Governance, Construction Technology, Stakeholder Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here