Everyone can be great, because everyone can serve – Martin Luther King, Jr.

Section 181 of the BCCM Act gives a disabled occupier the right to keep an assistance dog they rely on; no approval under the by-laws is required.

An assistance dog is one trained to perform identifiable physical tasks and behaviours to assist a person with a disability, to reduce the person’s need for support (Training).

An assistance dog can, but does not have to, be certified under the Guide, Hearing and Assistance Dogs Act 2009 (Qld) (GHAD Act).

If a claimed assistance dog is not certified, an Adjudicator from the Commissioner’s Office held:

…it is reasonable for the body corporate to ask for evidence of the dog’s training to perform identifiable physical tasks and behaviours to assist a person with a disability to reduce the person’s need for support. Where it is not provided, it is reasonable for the body corporate to assume the dog is not an assistance dog within the meaning of the GHAD Act, and therefore, section 181 of the BCCM Act.

This means that a Body Corporate can reasonably request evidence that the occupier has a disability under the GHAD Act and that the claimed assistance dog has the Training and, if that is not provided, assume the dog is not an assistance dog.

Recent decision: Support animal claim requires proper proof

In a recent case, a body corporate rejected a lot owners’ original application to keep a dog on the basis that pets within the building could aggravate the allergies and ill health suffered by residents, and that it would be difficult to mitigate the risk to those residents.

The applicants argued the rejection was unreasonable and the case went to conciliation with the BCCM, but no agreement was reached. The owners did not proceed with an adjudication application. However, four days later they informed the body corporate that they had registered their pet with the Gold Coast City Council as an ‘assistance dog’ and under Section 181 of the BCCM Act they could keep the dog as of right.

The Guide, Hearing and Assistance Dogs Act (GHAD) defines an assistance dog as a dog trained to perform identifiable physical tasks and behaviours to assist a person with a disability to reduce the person’s need for support.

The adjudicator agreed the body corporate acted reasonably to request evidence of the dog’s training and that registration with the Gold Coast City Council was insufficient proof. The owners did not provide the requested evidence and the application from the dog’s owners was dismissed.

To discuss this topic, or body corporate issues more generally, contact our friendly team.

Article Contribute by Bronwyn Rule, Associate Director at Hynes Legal

The post A BODY CORPORATE CAN REQUEST EVIDENCE OF A SERVICE ANIMAL’S TRAINING appeared first on Smart Strata | Body Corporate Management.