GK Strata Management
Registered as: G K Strata Management Pty Ltd
GK Strata Management manages around 400 strata schemes totalling 10,000 lots across NSW. It has a broad geographic spread across 69 suburbs, with Randwick as its largest market (13%). Its schemes have been involved in 14 tribunal and court decisions since 2021, none of which resulted in adverse findings.
Counts (~) are rounded figures sourced from the NSW StrataHub register. Figures may include duplication in staged or mixed-use developments and reflect data at the time of the last register extract.
Portfolio
88% residential
SCA NSW
Not listed
Fair Trading
✓ Not on register
Scheme Decisions
14 in portfolio since 2022
Portfolio Profile
Lot Types
Residential 87%
Commercial 2%
Utility 0%
Other 10%
Scheme Size Distribution
Distribution of schemes by total lot count. Average scheme size: 25.4 lots. Most schemes fall in the 11–25 lot range, typical of small apartment blocks.
Portfolio Age
Schemes by registration decade. Oldest scheme registered 1962, newest 2024.
Suburb Coverage
| Suburb | Schemes | Lots | % of Portfolio | Market Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Randwick 2031 | 53 | 1,351 | 13% | 6.5% | |
| Maroubra 2035 | 43 | 813 | 11% | 7.8% | |
| Coogee 2034 | 33 | 513 | 8% | 5.0% | |
| Kingsford 2032 | 22 | 294 | 6% | 10.3% | |
| Botany 2019 | 16 | 1,168 | 4% | 10.5% | |
| Hillsdale 2036 | 14 | 170 | 4% | 6.9% | |
| Surry Hills 2010 | 12 | 587 | 3% | 4.7% | |
| Bondi 2026 | 10 | 176 | 3% | 3.3% | |
| Bondi Beach 2026 | 10 | 155 | 3% | 2.1% | |
| Woollahra 2025 | 10 | 248 | 3% | 5.3% |
| Bellevue Hill 2023 | 10 | 105 | 3% | 2.4% | |
| Kogarah 2217 | 9 | 422 | 2% | 2.8% | |
| Mascot 2020 | 9 | 273 | 2% | 7.1% | |
| North Bondi 2026 | 9 | 114 | 2% | 3.0% | |
| Clovelly 2031 | 8 | 88 | 2% | 5.6% | |
| Darlinghurst 2010 | 7 | 178 | 2% | 2.8% | |
| Kensington 2033 | 7 | 138 | 2% | 3.2% | |
| Alexandria 2015 | 6 | 191 | 2% | 3.3% | |
| Elizabeth Bay 2011 | 6 | 213 | 2% | 4.1% | |
| Centennial Park 2021 | 5 | 203 | 1% | 9.4% | |
| Sydney 2000 | 4 | 187 | 1% | 0.9% | |
| Chippendale 2008 | 4 | 183 | 1% | 5.1% | |
| Paddington 2021 | 4 | 164 | 1% | 4.0% | |
| Queens Park 2022 | 4 | 66 | 1% | 11.8% | |
| Eastlakes 2018 | 4 | 68 | 1% | 3.4% | |
| Vaucluse 2030 | 4 | 46 | 1% | 1.1% | |
| Summer Hill 2130 | 4 | 64 | 1% | 2.6% | |
| Bronte 2024 | 4 | 31 | 1% | 2.2% | |
| Matraville 2036 | 3 | 137 | 1% | 2.0% | |
| Waterloo 2017 | 3 | 104 | 1% | 2.6% | |
| Redfern 2016 | 3 | 59 | 1% | 1.3% | |
| Glebe 2037 | 3 | 53 | 1% | 2.4% | |
| Potts Point 2011 | 3 | 48 | 1% | 1.5% | |
| South Coogee 2034 | 3 | 46 | 1% | 6.2% | |
| Double Bay 2028 | 3 | 36 | 1% | 1.4% | |
| Rosebery 2018 | 3 | 27 | 1% | 3.6% | |
| North Sydney 2060 | 2 | 340 | 1% | 0.8% | |
| Darling Point 2027 | 2 | 99 | 1% | 0.8% | |
| Camperdown 2050 | 2 | 113 | 1% | 2.0% | |
| Rushcutters Bay 2011 | 2 | 108 | 1% | 2.4% | |
| Mosman 2088 | 2 | 46 | 1% | 0.2% | |
| Marrickville 2204 | 2 | 38 | 1% | 0.6% | |
| Petersham 2049 | 2 | 25 | 1% | 2.0% | |
| Tamarama 2026 | 2 | 25 | 1% | 2.4% | |
| Lane Cove 2066 | 2 | 15 | 1% | 1.0% | |
| Point Piper 2027 | 2 | 24 | 1% | 1.9% | |
| Dulwich Hill 2203 | 1 | 80 | 0% | 0.5% | |
| Ultimo 2007 | 1 | 78 | 0% | 1.6% | |
| Milsons Point 2061 | 1 | 75 | 0% | 1.7% | |
| Marsfield 2122 | 1 | 49 | 0% | 0.7% | |
| Forest Lodge 2037 | 1 | 40 | 0% | 2.8% | |
| Balmain East 2041 | 1 | 32 | 0% | 2.9% | |
| Rozelle 2039 | 1 | 30 | 0% | 0.8% | |
| Woolloomooloo 2011 | 1 | 25 | 0% | 1.3% | |
| Cremorne 2090 | 1 | 24 | 0% | 0.2% | |
| Campsie 2194 | 1 | 18 | 0% | 0.2% | |
| Sans Souci 2219 | 1 | 17 | 0% | 0.4% | |
| Birchgrove 2041 | 1 | 17 | 0% | 2.9% | |
| Balmain 2041 | 1 | 14 | 0% | 0.8% | |
| Bondi Junction 2022 | 1 | 12 | 0% | 0.5% | |
| Stanmore 2048 | 1 | 12 | 0% | 1.2% | |
| Narrabeen 2101 | 1 | 8 | 0% | 0.5% | |
| Waverley 2024 | 1 | 8 | 0% | 1.2% | |
| Daceyville 2032 | 1 | 8 | 0% | 100.0% | |
| Darlington 2008 | 1 | 7 | 0% | 5.9% | |
| Hurstville 2220 | 1 | 6 | 0% | 0.2% | |
| Kirribilli 2061 | 1 | 6 | 0% | 0.5% | |
| Strathfield 2135 | 1 | 5 | 0% | 0.3% | |
| Wetherill Park 2164 | 1 | 5 | 0% | 1.0% |
Tribunal & Court History
14
Scheme Decisions
4
NCAT
6
Supreme Court
2
Court of Appeal
0.0
Manager Adverse / 100
3.5
Total per 100 Schemes
14 tribunal or court decisions in managed schemes since 2022. In none of these was GK Strata Management named as a party — all involved schemes they manage. No adverse findings against the manager.
Orders Made 10
Dismissed 4
By-law enforcement 5
Common property 2
Noise & nuisance 2
Levies & contributions 2
Parking & access 2
The Owners Corporation sought to amend court orders to include future works in its claims. The court dismissed the application, as the claim for future works was not pursued during the appeal. The court decided that the Owners Corporation should be held to the case it ran on appeal.
JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS — Application to vary orders — Where head of claim dismissed by primary judge on particular basis — Where basis successfully disturbed on appeal — Where head of claim not reagitated on appeal — Where Court of Appeal referred “remaining amounts claimed” to referee — Whether...
Before
Ward P, McHugh JA, Griffiths AJA
Hearing
On the papers
File Numbers
2024/00115025; 2024/00164446
Matched Strata Plans
SP6534
Parties
Owners Corporation v Lot Owner
Representation
Counsel: T Rollo (Appellant/Cross-Respondent) H Altan (First Respondent/First Cross-Appellant; Second Respondent/Second Cross-Appellant) Solicitors: Carroll & O’Dea Lawyers...
Orders
The notice of motion is dismissed with costs.
The applicant sought consent for alterations and additions to a residential flat building, including an external stair. The Court approved the development application, subject to conditions, after the parties reached an agreement and addressed the Council’s concerns regarding planning standards. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.
DEVELOPMENT APPEAL – alterations and additions to an existing residential flat building – justification of contravention of height of building development standard – conciliation conference – agreement between the parties – orders
Before
Espinosa C
Hearing
Conciliation conference held on 10 October 2025
File Numbers
2025/110592
Matched Strata Plans
SP6534
Parties
Third Party v Government
Representation
Counsel: S Black (Solicitor)(Applicant) S Hill (Solicitor)(Respondent) Solicitors: Carroll and O’Dea Lawyers (Applicant) HWL Ebsworth Lawyers (Respondent)
Orders
The Court orders: (1) The appeal is upheld. (2) Development Application No. DA2024/283/1, as amended, for alterations and additions to an existing residential flat building to construct an external stair for the purpose of improving access to and from Level 6 and 7 for repairs, maintenance and safety, and ancillary works is determined by the grant of consent subject to the conditions at Annexure A. (3) In accordance with s 8.15(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW),...
The Owners Corporation sought access to a lot to conduct inspections and exploratory works, including destructive investigations, to rectify common property defects. The parties reached a consent order for access. The Tribunal considered submissions on costs but found that neither party demonstrated special circumstances to be awarded costs and dismissed the applications for costs.
COSTS – settlement of proceedings – circumstances in which a costs order should be made where proceedings settle – no circumstances justifying departing from the position that costs will not usually be awarded where proceedings are settled. COSTS - special circumstances – whether established
Before
B Koch, General Member
Hearing
On the papers
File Numbers
2024/00324676
Matched Strata Plans
SP12971
Parties
Owners Corporation v Developer
Representation
Counsel: Mr P Lin (Applicant) Solicitors: JS Mueller & Co (Applicant) Mr S Alexander, Alexander Lawyers (Respondent)
Orders
1. Each party’s application for costs is dismissed.
The Owners Corporation appealed a lower court decision regarding a by-law concerning exclusive use of common property. The court found the primary judge had jurisdiction, the by-law was not unjust, and the Owners Corporation was entitled to various sums but did not make the necessary findings. The court set aside the lower court’s declarations and orders, and made new orders regarding payments and referrals.
COURTS AND JUDGES – Supreme Court – Jurisdiction – Whether Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to make declaration that condition of by-law unjust – Where statute conferred function of finding condition unjust on NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal LAND LAW – Strata title – By-laws – Whether...
Before
Ward P at [1]; McHugh JA at [2]; Griffiths AJA at [338].
Hearing
26-27 August 2024
File Numbers
2024/00115025; 2024/00164446; 2024/00115038
Matched Strata Plans
SP6534
Parties
Owners Corporation v Lot Owner
Representation
Counsel: A Cheshire SC and A Sivanathan (Owners Corporation SP6534) H Altan (Karam Elkhouri and Philippe Elkhouri) D Barnett and H Robinson (Perpetual Corporate Trust Ltd) Solicitors: Carroll &...
Orders
See paragraph [337]
Kellogg (Aust.) Pty Ltd sought to extinguish a drainage easement on their land. The tribunal granted the order, finding that all parties entitled to the benefit of the easement had consented to its extinguishment, and there was no order for costs.
LAND LAW – Easements – Extinguishment of easements – Extinguishment by order of court – Where all persons entitled to the easement consent to extinguishment
Before
Williams J
Hearing
25 November 2024
File Numbers
2024/373600
Matched Strata Plans
SP81034
Parties
Third Party v Owners Corporation
Representation
Counsel: Mr E Hyde and Mr D Morris (Plaintiff) Solicitors: Owen Hodge Lawyers (Plaintiff) J S Mueller & Co (First Defendant – Submitting Appearance) Clayton Utz (Second and Third Defendants –...
Orders
See orders at [31].
An owner sought to continue using an adjacent property for recreational purposes and claimed an entitlement to use the land, including by estoppel and easement. The tribunal dismissed these claims, found in favour of the adjacent land owner on the trespass claim, and ordered the defendant to remove structures built on the plaintiff's land.
TORTS — trespass to land — defences — land owned by plaintiff and plaintiff’s predecessor in title used by defendant’s predecessors in title and by defendant as garden since 1960s — plaintiff aware of use by 2009 — balcony, roof overhang, concrete slab, and deck constructed by defendant on, or...
Before
Parker J
Hearing
17, 18, 19 and 20 June; 5 July 2024; further written submissions ending 22 July 2024
File Numbers
2022/324943
Matched Strata Plans
SP16123
Parties
Third Party v Lot Owner
Representation
Counsel: Statement of Claim filed 31 October 2022 G A Sirtes SC/ D Robertson (Plaintiff) J Hutton SC (Defendant) Cross-Claim filed 19 December 2022 J Hutton SC (Cross-Claimant) G A Sirtes SC/ D...
Orders
See [498]–[501]
A lot owner appealed a decision requiring him to comply with a by-law regarding noise transmission from his floor. The tribunal upheld the original decision, finding no errors in the lower tribunal's interpretation or application of the by-law. The application for leave to appeal was refused.
LAND LAW---strata title---by-laws---inadequate floor covering---noise transmission---construction of by-law
Before
G Sarginson, Senior Member P H Molony, Senior Member
Hearing
27 February 2024
File Numbers
2023/00438760
Matched Strata Plans
SP2834
Parties
Lot Owner v Lot Owner
Representation
Counsel: WK Soon (Appellant) First Respondent (self-represented)
Orders
(1) Leave to appeal is refused. (2) The appeal is otherwise dismissed.
The applicant, the Executors, sought variations to orders regarding costs and the issuance of a certificate. The court made alterations to the orders, including the issuance of a strata interest notice and the exclusion of Lot 11 from certain levies and costs. Each party was required to cover their own expenses related to the motion.
JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – amending, varying and setting aside orders – corrections under slip rule – orders amended
Before
Elkaim AJ
Hearing
19 April 2024
File Numbers
2018/93444
Matched Strata Plans
SP6534
Parties
Lot Owner v Owners Corporation
Representation
Counsel: Mr H Altan (Plaintiffs) Mr D Byrne (Defendant) Mr A Sivanathan (Defendant) Solicitors: Bartier Perry (Plaintiffs) Carroll & O'Dea Lawyers (Defendant)
Orders
See paras 19-20
The court revisited the issue of costs, interest, and the cost of recovering unpaid levies after its primary judgment. The court ordered the Executors and Perpetual to pay specific costs, including interest under the Strata Schemes Management Act. The court decided on the appropriate apportionment of costs between the parties.
COSTS – Costs assessment – Determination – Mixed results – Parties succeeding and failing in both claims and cross claims – Intent to find just and equitable costs solution to whole of the proceedings
Before
Elkaim AJ
Hearing
On the papers
File Numbers
2018/93444; 2022/98817
Matched Strata Plans
SP6534
Parties
Lot Owner v Owners Corporation
Representation
Counsel: 2018/93444 Mr H Altan (Plaintiffs) Mr D Byrne (Defendant) Mr A Sivanathan (Defendant) 2022/98817 Mr D Barnett (Plaintiff) Ms H Robinson (Plaintiff) Mr D Byrne (Defendant) Mr A Sivanathan...
Orders
In proceedings 2018/93444 (Executors v Owners Corporation) it is ordered that: 1. Each party is to pay its own costs of the statement of claim. 2. The Executors are to pay the Owners Corporation’s costs of the cross-claim. 3. The Executors are to pay the Owners Corporation $16,827.85 in respect of interest arising under the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW). 4. The Executors are to pay the Owners Corporation the sum of $123,510.39 being interest on the sum of $450,369.37 already...
An estate and a mortgagee sued the owners corporation over a by-law regarding exclusive use of balconies and a rooftop, along with related levies. The tribunal found a clause of the by-law to be unjust and some levies unreasonable. The tribunal also ordered that unpaid levies be paid by the applicant and remitted the case to NCAT for further orders, but dismissed the applicant's claim for damages.
LAND LAW – Strata title – By-laws – Whether By-law granting exclusive use rights conditional on four critical obligations had been complied with – Whether clause of By-law ceasing exclusive use rights unless critical obligations were complied with is unjust – Whether clause of By-law ceasing...
Before
Elkaim AJ
Hearing
7-16 February 2024
File Numbers
2018/93444 2022/98817
Matched Strata Plans
SP6534
Parties
Lot Owner v Owners Corporation
Representation
Counsel: 2018/93444 Mr H Altan (Plaintiffs) Mr D Byrne / Mr A Sivanathan (Defendant) 2022/98817 Mr D Barnett / Ms H Robinson (Plaintiff) Mr D Byrne / Mr A Sivanathan (Defendant) Solicitors:...
Orders
See paras 249-251
The owners corporation sought orders relating to trees on a neighbouring property, alleging damage to the boundary fence and obstruction of sunlight and views. The tribunal found in favour of the owners corporation for fence repair and pruning of specific trees. The tribunal decided other trees didn't form a hedge.
TREES (DISPUTES BETWEEN NEIGHBOURS) – Pt 2 application – fence damage caused by neighbouring tree – Pt 2A application – whether the trees are planted so as to form a hedge – obstruction of sunlight and views – orders for pruning
Before
Galwey AC
Hearing
24 August 2023
File Numbers
2023/213166
Matched Strata Plans
SP91797
Parties
Owners Corporation v Lot Owner
Representation
Counsel M Langenheim (Applicant) P Moore (Self-represented) (First Respondent) C Quaine (Self-represented) (Second Respondent) P Moore, C Quaine, A Harding, L Bell (Self-represented) (Third...
Orders
The Court orders: (1) The Pt 2 application is granted. (2) Within 60 days of the date of these orders, the first and second respondents are to restore the vertical alignment of, and make secure, the section of the applicant’s boundary fence immediately to the south of the southeast corner post of the first and second respondents’ property. (3) The applicant is to provide any access required for the first and second respondents to complete the works in order (2) during reasonable hours, on 48...
Lot owners sought to change the strata scheme by-laws to allow exclusive use of common property roof area. The tribunal and appeal panel found the owners corporation refusal was not unreasonable. The court dismissed the appeal and ordered the lot owners to pay the owners corporation's costs.
LAND LAW – strata title – common property – two by-laws to obtain rights to exclusive use and enjoyment of common property – first proposal offered repairs and maintenance – second proposal offered monetary compensation – other lot owners concerned about noise, loss of privacy, lack of...
Before
Basten AJ
Hearing
19 September 2022
File Numbers
2022/00174374
Matched Strata Plans
SP4350
Parties
Lot Owner v Owners Corporation
Representation
Counsel: Mr R Newlinds SC / Ms M Hall (Plaintiffs) Mr M Isaac (Defendant) Solicitors: Deutsch Miller (Plaintiffs) Kerin Benson Lawyers (Defendant)
Orders
(1) With respect to the decision of the Appeal Panel given on 25 May 2022 dismissing the appeal from the senior member – (a) Grant the plaintiffs leave to appeal, pursuant to s 83(1) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013; (b) Dismiss the appeal. (2) With respect to the application for leave to appeal from the decision of the Appeal Panel given on 28 July 2022 awarding costs – refuse the plaintiffs leave to appeal. (3) Order that the plaintiffs pay the defendant’s costs in this Court.
The applicant appealed a previous decision and sought costs. The tribunal found special circumstances existed, and ordered the appellant to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal. The tribunal deferred the decision on costs from the first instance proceedings.
COSTS – special circumstances
Before
R C Titterton OAM, Senior Member E Bishop, Senior Member
Hearing
On the papers
File Numbers
2021/00363291
Matched Strata Plans
SP4350
Parties
Lot Owner v Lot Owner
Representation
Counsel: D Knoll AM (Appellants) M Isaacs (Respondent) Solicitors: Strata Specialist Lawyers (Appellants) Kerin Benson Lawyers (Respondent)
Orders
(1) A hearing is dispensed with. (2) The appellant is to pay the respondent’s costs as agreed or as assessed.
The applicant appealed a previous decision, seeking to have a by-law registered to allow exclusive use of a common property roof area. The tribunal found an error of law, but decided to uphold the original orders made to dismiss the application and that the respondent undertakes work to the roof.
LAND LAW – Strata schemes – Proposed common property rights by-law – Whether unreasonably refused
Before
R C Titterton OAM, Senior Member E Bishop, Senior Member
Hearing
29 March 2022
File Numbers
2021/00363291
Matched Strata Plans
SP4350
Parties
Lot Owner v Owners Corporation
Representation
Counsel: D Knoll AM (Appellants) M Isaacs (Respondent) Solicitors: Strata Specialist Lawyers Appellants Kerin Benson Lawyers (Respondent)
Orders
1. The orders of the Tribunal made on 29 November 2021 in matter SC 20/47052 are confirmed. 2. The parties are directed to file and serve submissions as to costs within 14 days setting out the relevant costs rule and the reasons why they say they are entitled to costs. 3. The parties may respond to the other’s submissions within a further 14 days.
Frequently Asked Questions
- How many strata schemes does GK Strata Management manage in NSW?
- GK Strata Management manages around 400 strata schemes (around 10,000 total lots) across 69 suburbs in New South Wales, based on the NSW StrataHub register.
- What areas does GK Strata Management provide strata management in?
- GK Strata Management is most active in Randwick, Maroubra, Coogee, covering 69 suburbs across NSW in total.
- Does GK Strata Management specialise in residential or commercial strata?
- GK Strata Management manages primarily residential (88% residential, 2% commercial).
- What is the average scheme size managed by GK Strata Management?
- GK Strata Management manages schemes averaging 25 lots each, compared to the NSW state average of approximately 20 lots per scheme.
- Is GK Strata Management a member of Strata Community Association (SCA) NSW?
- Based on the SCA NSW online directory, GK Strata Management does not appear as a current member.
- Does GK Strata Management have any NSW Fair Trading enforcement actions?
- GK Strata Management does not appear on the NSW Fair Trading Name and Shame Register, indicating no recorded enforcement actions as of our last data update.
- How many NCAT or court cases involve schemes managed by GK Strata Management?
- 14 tribunal or court cases involving schemes managed by GK Strata Management appear in NSW caselaw records since 2022.
- What is GK Strata Management's NSW strata management licence number?
- GK Strata Management's NSW licence number is 221911, issued under the Property and Stock Agents Act 2002.