Condominium Bylaws and Common-Property Management — What Every Owner and Manager Must Know

Most disputes in a condominium — and especially in office and commercial buildings — don't stem from ill will but from a lack of clarity: who is responsible for what, who pays for what, and who is even authorized to decide. The answers to these three questions are written in one place — the bylaws — and anchored in the Land Law, 5729-1969, which regulates the condominium and the common property. Whoever knows these tools manages a building quietly; whoever doesn't discovers them only when an argument erupts over parking, a roof repair or an expense account. This guide covers everything an owner and a manager must know — and translates the legal terms into day-to-day management.

What is a "condominium" — and why it's not self-evident

A "condominium" is not just a building with several owners. It's a precise legal term: a structure registered as such in the condominiums register at the Land Registry (the Tabu), divided into separate units — apartments, offices or shops — each registered under independent ownership. This registration is what creates the legal framework within which all the rules live: the units, the common property, the relative shares and the bylaws.

The distinction is critical in office and commercial buildings, which usually have a variety of owners — some use the space themselves, some lease it out. Each holds a registered "unit," and each unit has a relative share in the common property. Once the building is registered as a condominium, it stops being a collection of private assets and becomes a managed entity with its own internal set of rules. Whoever buys an office in such a building also buys, without always noticing, a partnership in all the common property — and shared responsibility for its maintenance.

A point many miss: the status of a condominium is not just a "formal registration" in the Tabu but the source of all the internal rights and duties. The registration defines exactly what each owner bought — his unit, his relative share in the common property, and every attachment belonging to his unit. So when an argument arises over boundaries, responsibility or payment, the first document to open is the condominium registration order and the registered bylaws — they are the factual basis, and any verbal understanding or "how we've always done it" gives way to them.

What the common property includes — and what it doesn't

The definition of common property in the Land Law is a residual and remarkably simple definition: the common property is all the parts of the condominium that aren't registered as a separate unit. That is — if something is not an apartment or a unit registered under someone's ownership, it belongs jointly to all the owners. This makes the question "whose is it?" simpler than it seems: first you check whether the part is registered as a unit; if not — it's common.

In practice the common property usually includes:

• The land and the foundations on which the building stands.
• The roof, the exterior walls and the envelope — the structural frame itself.
• The stairwells, the lobby, the corridors and the entrances — all the common circulation spaces.
• The elevators and the vertical-transport systems.
• The central systems — main electrical, water, sewage, central HVAC, fire detection and suppression, control systems.
• Additional common areas — a shared parking garage, courtyard, machine rooms, a shelter.

The management implication is enormous: all of these are the shared responsibility of the owners, even if a particular office owner never enters the pump room. When an elevator breaks down or the roof leaks, it's everyone's expense — not that of whoever's unit is closest to the fault. A correct understanding of the boundary of the common property is the basis for every discussion about repairs, responsibility and expense allocation. We expanded on who is supposed to actually manage this whole web in the difference between a house committee and a management company.

There's also a gray area worth knowing: it's not always clear whether a particular component "belongs" to the unit or to the common property. The entrance door to an office — up to where is it private and from where does the frame become part of the common envelope? A pipe segment that passes through a unit's wall but serves the whole building — whose is it? The principled answer derives again from the residuality rule and the registration: what's not registered as part of the unit tends to be considered common, and a component that serves the whole building is usually part of the common system even if it physically passes through a private unit. In a well-managed building, these boundary questions are resolved in advance in the bylaws or a written procedure — not in the middle of a dispute.

Default bylaws versus agreed bylaws — two default states

Here lies one of the most important concepts, and most owners aren't familiar with it. Every condominium has bylaws — even if no one ever drafted any. The Land Law provides "default bylaws" — a default text attached to the law that applies automatically to any condominium that hasn't adopted other bylaws. In other words: if you did nothing, you're already operating under the default bylaws.

The default bylaws regulate the basic rules — managing the common property, allocating expenses, making decisions at a meeting. They're reasonable, but generic: they were written as a common denominator for all condominiums in Israel, not tailored to the needs of a specific building — and certainly not to an office or commercial building with tenants, different operating hours and varied uses.

For those who want different rules, the law allows adopting agreed bylaws — bylaws that the owners draft and decide on themselves, to change or add to the default. You can, for example, set a different expense-allocation key, regulate the use of common areas, or define rules for operating hours and maintenance. But there's a substantive condition here: for the agreed bylaws to be binding — and especially to bind future owners who buy a unit in the building — they must be registered at the Land Registry. Bylaws that were agreed but not registered may not bind whoever was not a party to the agreement. The registration is what turns an internal agreement into a binding and public rule.

When is it worthwhile to bother adopting agreed bylaws at all? Whenever the default doesn't suit the building's character. In an office and commercial building that's almost always the case: mixed uses, tenants with different requirements, commercial spaces that draw crowds, and sometimes an uneven distribution of load on the common systems. Agreed bylaws allow the rules to be adapted to reality — instead of forcibly adapting reality to generic rules. It's important to remember that adopting agreed bylaws is a substantive decision made at the general meeting of the owners, and not on the initiative of a single party; it's a shared decision that should be formed transparently, since it binds everyone — and whoever buys a unit in the future.

A common mistake is to think the bylaws are a "one-time" document written once and forgotten. In practice, a building changes: uses are added, systems are installed, tenants change and the nature of the activity changes. Bylaws not updated for years may regulate a building that no longer exists. A periodic review of the bylaws — whether they still reflect reality and a fair allocation of expenses — is part of good governance, not a formality.

Expense allocation and the allocation key

The question of "who pays how much" is the most common source of dispute, so it's important to understand the default. Under the law, in the absence of another arrangement, the owners bear the common-property expenses according to their relative share in the unit — that is, the larger a unit's relative share, the larger its share in the common expenses. This is the default "allocation key."

This key makes sense for a uniform residential building, but is often unfair in an office and commercial building. A ground-floor shop that draws large crowds may "consume" the lobby and entrance much more than an upper-floor office; a tenant with intensive commercial activity may burden the elevators and cleaning more than another. In such cases, an allocation key set by relative share alone may create a sense of injustice.

Here the agreed bylaws come in again: the owners may set in them a different allocation key — for example by use, by floor, or by another agreed arrangement — provided it's duly registered. The decision on an adapted key is one of the clearest reasons to bother adopting agreed bylaws in a commercial building. What matters from a management standpoint is that the allocation method be written, agreed and transparent — because an expense that isn't understood is an expense that generates an argument. We expanded on choosing the party that actually manages the expenses and reporting in how to choose a property management company.

Attachment and exclusive use — when part of the common property is "attached" to a unit

Not every space that looks common is really for everyone's use. The law recognizes a mechanism of attachment: part of the common property can be attached to a particular unit, so that its use is reserved for that unit's owner alone. Typical examples: an attached parking space, a storeroom, or a roof area attached to an upper-floor office.

The important principle worth remembering: an attachment is not created by a "verbal agreement" or by the very fact of actual use over the years. For part of the common property to be considered attached to a unit, it must arise from the registered bylaws and the registration at the Land Registry. That is — the attachment is a registered act, exactly like the agreed bylaws themselves.

From this stem two common mistakes. The first: assuming that a space you've used for years "belongs to you" — while from a registration standpoint it remained common property. The second: buying a unit on the assumption that a particular parking space or storeroom is included, without checking whether they are indeed attached in the registration. Before any transaction, and before any argument over "who's entitled to use what," you must check the bylaws and the registration — they are the determining source, not habit.

An attachment also has a maintenance and payment aspect that's easy to miss. The very fact that a space is attached to a unit for its exclusive use doesn't fully detach it from the common framework — the rules regarding who is responsible for maintaining it, and who bears the costs relating to it, are also determined within the bylaws and the registration. So two questions must be asked together: who is entitled to use the space (the attachment), and who is responsible for maintaining and funding it. In a well-managed building both questions are documented and agreed in advance, so that a unit owner with an attached roof or an attached parking space knows exactly what his right is and what his duty is — and there are no surprises when a repair comes.

The condominium's building representation — who manages and who is authorized to act

The common property belongs to everyone — but "everyone" can't sign a contract or sue a vendor. For this, the law creates the condominium's building representation: the body that manages the common property and is authorized to act on behalf of the owners — to enter into agreements, collect expenses, and if necessary even sue and be sued in matters of the common property. The representation is, in effect, the condominium's legal "address" to the outside world.

Alongside the representation operates the general meeting of the owners — the forum where the substantive decisions are made: approving the budget, electing the representation, decisions on works, and adopting or changing agreed bylaws. The division of roles is clear: the meeting decides, the representation executes and represents. Understanding this boundary prevents a large part of the confrontations — a representation that acts without the meeting's backing exceeds its authority, and a meeting that tries to manage day-to-day operations paralyzes the management.

In large office buildings, the representation usually doesn't manage itself but appoints a professional management company that operates the common property as a service. Even then, the legal authority and responsibility remain with the representation and the owners — the management company acts on their behalf and within the framework that the bylaws and the meeting set. We expanded on the complexity of management when there's a multiplicity of tenants and owners in one building in the challenges of managing a multi-tenant building.

Dispute resolution — the Land Registrar's adjudicator

Even with good bylaws, disputes happen: an argument over an expense, over use of a common space, over an owner's refusal to pay, or over interpretation of the bylaws. Condominiums have a dedicated address for this — the Land Registrar's adjudicator, who operates at the Land Registry and holds quasi-judicial authority to hear disputes relating to the condominium.

The practical meaning is important: instead of being dragged into a general civil proceeding, condominium disputes are routed to a body that specializes in exactly these issues — interpretation of bylaws, expense allocation, use of common property, the representation's powers. This shortens and streamlines the dispute resolution, and provides greater certainty to both parties. The very existence of the adjudicator is also an incentive to conduct oneself correctly from the start: an owner who knows there's a clear, professional forum tends less to "take the law into his own hands" and more to rely on what's written in the bylaws and the registration.

The management lesson: orderly documentation — the bylaws, meeting minutes, the common-expense accounts and how they were calculated — is not bureaucracy. In every approach to the adjudicator, the party holding transparent, orderly documentation is in a far stronger position. Transparent, documented management is not just fairness; it's insurance against the next dispute.

Good governance in an office building — from rules to practice

In residential buildings, the bylaws and the representation are usually enough. In office and commercial buildings, the gap between "what's written in the law" and "what happens in the field" is larger — a multiplicity of owners, changing tenants, varied uses and high commercial sensitivity to every expense. Three principles turn the legal framework into management that works:

1. Clear and updated bylaws: agreed and registered bylaws, tailored to the building's character — a fair allocation key, rules for using common areas, regulation of attachments — prevent most disputes before they're even born.
2. Transparent expense allocation: every owner needs to understand exactly what he's paying for, by which key, and what's included in the common property. Transparency is the difference between an expense paid without argument and an account that blows up into a stormy meeting.
3. Professional, documented management: a management company acting on behalf of the representation, scheduling maintenance, collecting expenses and reporting transparently — is the party that holds the full picture and the documentation that protects everyone.

This is exactly where digital tools change the game. Instead of scattered accounts and lost minutes, transparent management consolidates the expenses, reports and documents in one place that every owner can see. For further background on managing the commercial-contractual side vis-à-vis tenants, see the owner's guide to the commercial lease, and complete your knowledge in the knowledge center and with the practical tools in the toolbox.

At Domera Hub we turn common-property management into something transparent and measurable — clear expense allocation, open reporting to all owners and consolidated documentation that protects the representation. Continue reading on a house committee versus a management company and on how to choose a property management company, or get a quote for transparent management of the common property in your building.