Strata law consultation extended for second time

| 11/04/2013

538e1487-ec7b-4a6d-af33-31b177a7cd89.1.jpg(CNS): Questions raised about another hew piece of legislation drafted by the former UDP administration has led to an extension of the consulting period pushing it past the election date. The Law Reform Commission has agreed to a request by the Caymanian Bar Association and the Cayman Islands Law Society to extend the date for comments on the strata titles reform to 31st May, 2013. This will be the second extension to the proposed law which comes in the wake of an amendment to the original law last year that allowed strata to tear down and redevelop Seven Mile Beach condos with a supermajority vote instead of a unanimous vote described as an attack on individual property rights, by the local real estate industry.

Comments on the proposed new bill and discussion paper should be submitted in writing and delivered to the Directorof the Law Reform Commission at 1st Floor dms House, Genesis Close or sent by e-mail to


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Local News

About the Author ()

Comments (8)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymously says:

    I understand there is a group in the USA that is meeting this afternoon to bring this to the attention of the world throughout with the help of international press, better beware this thing is going global.

    • Anonymous says:

      Good. This was legislation by the back door at the behest of developers and realtors, looking to make more fast bucks at the expense of their former customers’ property rights. It is potentially disastrous for a jurisdiction like Cayman to create such uncertainty in the market. What were our legislators thinking of? Or we’re they just not thinking?

      • Anonymous says:

        Unanimous voting means the property will never change. It makes sense not to let a few owners block everyone else.

  2. Anonymass says:

    I am allways amazed how 'interested parties' can't seem to get themselves organised to comment on proposed legislation but expect government to twist in the wind waiting on their input, extending and extending consultation periods. Perhaps, at the end fo this one, the late-submitted comments could be published so the public jury can judge whether it was worth the wait. Justice delayed is justice denied can apply to the law as well as the ajudication of the law.

    • Anonymous says:

      Dear allways amazed. The laws are sometimes so badly drafted first time round, and such short deadlines given for comments on them, that serial postponements have to be asked for to get it right. The injustices that you mention arise when those postponements are not given, not when proper consultation is offered. That is shown by the strata legislation passed last year: there was no consultation on it, as a result of which it’s now attracting (justified) protest.

      Aggreed though that the comments should be published. The reason they aren’t is probably that they tend to highlight the problems in the first draft.

      • Anonymass says:

        Nothing is stooping the emminent parties from posting their submissions themselves. Otherwise it looks an awful lot like objection for objection's sake. I'm amazaed you can't see that.

      • Anonymous says:

        Actually, its the strata law (2005) they're amending now and still waiting for public input on. The first round of consultation was in 2011. Changes were made and a new draft put out for comment this year. (Based on an iNews article)  Perhaps you meant some other Law?

    • Anonymous says:

      The section in regards to supermajority voting was not put in by the Commission tasked with receiving public comments – it was inserted late last year in haste by the former Cabinet in hopes that nobody would notice or object.  As of last week, the old 2011 draft was the latest version posted on  Unless you were given a copy of the 2013 version (or saw it on the news – thanks CNS) you would not have known.  I'm glad to see Cayman stakeholders are awake at the wheel and are taking a stand to defend property Rights.  Frankly, I'm surprised there has not been more of an uproar.