Impact of ownership and architectural design on property disputes in multi-owned buildings
Introduction
Response to disputes in multi-owned buildings (MOBs) is a global challenge for ensuring harmonious living environments in urban areas (Blandy et al., 2010). With rapid urbanization, the sharp rise of the population in MOBs has increased property disputes among owners, which negatively affect the living experience and well-being of communities in the buildings (Leshinsky et al., 2012; Easthope et al., 2014). The approach for managing disputes has received considerable attention, especially dispute avoidance – a logical response to prevent high cost, time, and emotional concern in dispute resolution (Leshinsky & Mouat, 2012). This approach has its ground on the fact that a significant amount of disputations can be reduced by addressing root causes (Kumaraswamy, 1997; Christensen & Wallace, 2006). The identification of dispute sources provides a basis for controlling them to minimize dispute occurrence and influence.
MOBs generally take an ownership form commonly known as Strata title or Condominium – a complex arrangement of exclusive rights to use individual units by separate owners and shared rights to common areas and services jointly held by groups of unit owners (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2019; Dupuis et al., 2010; Altmann et al., 2018; Paulsson, 2007). The form intertwined with building structures creates private communal living where the close proximity of neighbors and a sharing of property interests exist. It requires a high degree of physical, legal, social, and financial affiliation from owners, along with collective decision-making on managing common properties (Bailey et al., 1997; Fisher & McPhail, 2014). A significant likelihood of disputes among owners on their financial relations, behaviors, and different levels of satisfaction is inherent in MOB living (Hastings et al., 2006; Easthope & Randolph, 2018, pp. 112–126). Disputes are defined as unsettled disagreements (conflicts) between different parties that require resolution by third-party adjudication (Yates, 2003; McGeorge et al., 2007). This research focuses on disputes among owners and owner groups associated with MOB use and management, stemming from issues in ownership rights, responsibilities, and restrictions (RRRs).
Recent studies highlighted poor ownership structure and architectural design as one of the major sources of disputes in MOBs (Goodman & Douglas, 2008; Johnston & Reid, 2013; Gao, 2015). The conflicts are likely to develop into disputes when (1) owners' needs fail to meet since their rights to use and enjoy MOBs are infringed by ownership form or building design and functions, (2) the imbalanced distribution of RRRs provides owners with unfair powers and obligations to managing buildings, or (3) owners confuse the 3D extent of their ownership RRRs, and then misuse or mismanage MOBs (Cradduck, 2013; Sherry, 2018; Easthope et al., 2012; Shin et al., 2020). As planning factors, the ownership and architectural MOB forms outline the living environment and act as starting points of conflicts among owners; it contributes to dispute incidence, together with the owner group's socio-economic and behavioral characteristics.
Despite its vital role in dispute outbreaks, the impact of ownership and architectural MOB forms on the dispute within owner groups have not been examined sufficiently. Existing research on disputes in MOBs has centered on exploring social and human factors, such as owners' collective actions in managing MOB (Ho & Gao, 2013), owners group's management proficiency (Christudason, 2008; Lujanen, 2010), and dispute resolution skill (Douglas & Goodman, 2018, pp. 213–230). In addition, relevant studies tend to narrowly and fragmentally address certain planning factors that affect owners' disagreement and dissatisfaction and cause disputes, likewise ownership rights (Ho et al., 2006; Johnston, 2016), structures of owner groups (Wai-Chung Lai & Yik-Long Chan, 2004; Christudason, 2004), design of communal spaces (Zhu, 2015; Sajan, 2015), and layout and design of dwelling (Buys & Miller, 2012). It takes theoretical approaches using results from literature review, interviews, and case studies; partial explanations based on specific cases from scattered perspectives are insufficient to generalize the impact of individual MOB factors on the disputes.
The lack of understanding of ownership structure and architectural design of MOBs relevant to disputes limits adequate consideration on them in the subdivision and design practice (Easthope et al., 2014; Cradduck, 2013). It has impeded opportunities to minimize disputes and their negative influence before the costly, time-consuming, and stressful dispute resolution procedure (Christensen & Wallace, 2006). Empirical research on identifying common sources of MOB disputes and their impacts is demanded to facilitate proactive dispute avoidance in urban living. To fill the knowledge gap, this paper aims to identify ownership and architectural factors of MOBs to be controlled at planning stages by investigating their impacts on the occurrence and intensity of disputes within the owner groups. As an initial study to explore the sources of disputes, this research focuses on the connection between planning factors, excluding social and human factors. In addition, the MOB system in Victoria, Australia, which is one form of strata title, is exemplified for in-depth analysis of ownership and architectural forms.
Section snippets
MOB system in Victoria
Even though MOBs in many countries share certain contexts, their detailed structures vary since each jurisdiction has a unique legal framework (Paulsson, 2007). All strata title systems generate a property with four components: individual ownership of a Lot (flat or unit), communal ownership of common property (CP, all building parts not defined as Lots), membership of owners corporation (OC), and by-laws (Sherry, 2016); they use strata or subdivision plans to declare the divided ownership (
Research method
In line with the research aim, an empirical approach is established to generalize the extent to which ownership and architectural factors causing disputes impact on the intensity of disputes (DI). The 12 factors triggering disputation that were discussed in section 2.3 are defined as independent variables. The DI level is construed as a dependent variable; it is measured by a method proposed by this research. The investigated impacts are used as a basis for identifying the MOB factors necessary
Measurement of dispute intensity
This study measures the DI as a dependent variable affected by MOB factors in section 2.3. The DI, here, refers to a degree of the direct influence of occurred disputes on owners and OCs in MOBs. There is no consensus about methods for measuring the DI in MOBs, but many models suggested in the building sectors adopt a risk assessment approach (Kumaraswamy, 1997; Kumar et al., 2017; Molenaar et al., 2000; Aibinu, 2009; Gebken & Gibson, 2006). These models perceive disputes as potential risks –
Data collection
All data for measuring independent and dependent variables regarding 101 VCAT cases were collected from written orders of each case, including case outlines, catchwords, and reason for decision. As depicted in Fig. 3, independent variables were quantified by assigning numeric values according to the decision reason. Data for the DI parameters were summarized by extracting specific keywords in the written orders.
Discussion
This research identified 12 ownership and architectural MOB factors causing disputes and examined their importance and interaction on determining the intensity of disputes within owner groups in MOBs, applying Boosted Classification Trees. The results from 101 dispute cases in Victoria connote that all factors are closely interrelated and have statistically meaningful impacts on the DI. It infers that the integrated consideration of building subdivision and design is necessary to minimize the
Conclusion
As the frequency of property disputes in MOBs increases, a proper understanding of their causes becomes essential to minimize the disputations and their influence proactively. Ownership structure and architectural design of MOBs are regarded as leading causes of disputes; however, the generalized factors and their implications on the dispute have not been examined sufficiently. To fill this knowledge gap, this research aims to identify ownership and architectural factors of MOBs impacting on
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Jihye Shin: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Investigation, Formal analysis, Visualization, Validation, Writing - original draft. Abbas Rajabifard: Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition, Writing - review & editing. Mohsen Kalantari: Supervision, Funding acquisition, Writing - review & editing. Behnam Atazadeh: Supervision, Writing - review & editing.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This research was funded by Australian Research Council, grant number LP160100292. The authors acknowledge the support of project partners: Land Use Victoria, Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping (ICSM) and City of Melbourne. Special thanks to Dr Ali Mahmoudi for providing his constructive comments in statistical modeling. The authors emphasize that the views expressed in this article are the authors' alone.
References (77)
Collective actions for the management of multi-owned residential building: A case of Hong Kong
Habitat International
(2015)- et al.
Collective action in apartment building management in Hong Kong
Habitat International
(2013) Toward community engagement: Can the built environment help? Grassroots participation and communal space in Chinese urban communities
Habitat International
(2015)- et al.
“The impacts of dwelling conditions on older persons' psychological well-being in Hong Kong: The mediating role of residential satisfaction
Social Science & Medicine
(2005) - et al.
Measuring soil coverage using image feature descriptors and the decision tree learning algorithm
Biosystems Engineering
(2020) - et al.
Multi-owned housing: Law, power and practice
(2010) - et al.
What are they fighting about? Research into disputes in victorian owners corporations
Australasian Dispute Resolution Journal
(2012) How property title impacts urban consolidation: A life cycle examination of multi-title developments
Urban Policy and Research
(2014)- et al.
New ways to think about conflict resolution for more harmonious strata living
Plan. News
(2012) Conflicts, claims and disputes in construction
Engineering Construction and Architectural Management
(1997)
Links between physical and legal structures of community title schemes and disputes
Australian Property Law Journal
Guidelines on the management and ownership of condominium housing
Introduction
Restrictions and responsibilities in context
3D property rights: An analysis of key factors based on international experience,” royal Institute of technology (KTH)
management of flats in multiple ownership: Learning from other countries. Policy press in association with the joseph rowntree foundation
“Residents' experiences in condominiums: A case study of Australian apartment living
Housing Studies
Governance in a co-ownership environment: The management of multiple-ownership property in Hong Kong
Property Management
“Experiencing density: The implications of strata titling for urban renewal in Australian cities,” in urban regeneration in Australia, routledge
Can claims and disputes (in construction contracts) be prevented or reduced
Building Journal Hongkong China
Dispute avoidance and resolution a literature review
CRC Constr. Innov. Rep
Privatized communities: The use of owners corporations in master planned estates in Melbourne
Australian Geographic
Multi-owned developments: A life cycle review of a developing research area
Property Management
Living a managed community lifestyle: Managed community lifestyle from Queensland
Property Management
Conflict between private and public restrictions
Governing the compact city: The role and effectiveness of strata management,” sydney, Australia
Legislation affecting common property management in Singapore: Confusion or solution through fragmentation?
Property Management
Legal challenges in ensuring regular maintenance and repairs of common parts of owner-occupied apartment buildings
Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction
“Addressing conflict within an owners corporation,” in multi-owned property in the asia-pacific region, springer
The leasehold system as a land management measure to attain sustainable development planning by contract
Property Management
“An examination of how conflicts of interest detract from developers upholding governance responsibilities in the transition phase of multi-owned developments: Agrounded theory approach,” griffith university
“The formation of owners' corporations in Hong Kong's private housing estates: A probit evaluation of mancur olson's group theory
Property Management
Common property in strata titled developments in Singapore: Common misconceptions
Property Management
Design implications for multi-owned properties from a household survey
International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis
Residential satisfaction in inner urban higher-density brisbane, Australia: Role of dwelling design, neighbourhood and neighbours
Journal of Environmental Planning and Management
Strata title property rights: Private governance of multi-owned properties
“International condominium systems,” in the politics and practices of apartment living
The law of strata title in Australia: A jurisdictional stocktake
Australian Property Law Journal
Cited by (7)
A BIM-based framework for property dispute minimization – A case study for Victoria, Australia
2022, Land Use PolicyCitation Excerpt :Inappropriate conditions of these features are generated by interactions of multiple components of MOB ownership and architectural systems. Christensen and Wallace (2006) and Shin et al. (2021) empirically demonstrate the collaborative influences of the components on property disputes by analyzing datasets of dispute cases. The components contributing to disputes show complicated interrelationships, and a change in one component can affect multiple dynamically.
Collective renovation decisions in multi-owned housing management: the case of public–private homeowners associations in Poland
2023, Journal of Housing and the Built EnvironmentArtificial intelligence enabled participatory planning: a review
2023, International Journal of Urban SciencesCauses of disputes in the construction industry – a systematic literature review
2023, Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction