There is no doubt that the areas that are the common property that are within the fenced area of lots that are not exclusive use areas. An example is lot 1
There is first the issue that by making any approval for a fence or gate to be built that the result would be the decision would be changing the rights and privileges to the owner who then would have restricted access to part of the common property, thus the decision is a restricted issue for the committee.
Additionally under section 177, an improvement can’t make the owner breach a by-law:
As there are fences at the back of lot 1 create a by-law contravention
Lot 1 has plants in the ground and gardens in the area that is common property, this creates a by-law contravention
Lot 1 may have contravened a by-law if it has benches and items stored on the ground that is common property, this creates a by-law contravention.
By-law 11
The owner of lot 1 has a dog, that leaves the lot into the area (fenced) and will then bi on common property, thus causing viloations of the condition of approval to keep a pet.
The wording, “installed by the occupier of the lot” means when the person who made installed the fixture or fitting is no longer the occupier, the body assumes responsiblty for maintenance, as the things installed are no longer for “the occupiers” benefit, as that occupier has left..