Strata scheme CTS 19671

CTS 19671 · Registration date not recorded · Lot count not recorded · Queensland checked 30 June 2026

Public record: 5 tribunal matters. A reasonable pre-screen, but not the full picture, the financials and minutes that decide the purchase are in the report, not the registers. Read it, and obtain a strata records search, before you bid.

5 tribunal or court matters, the most serious about by-laws
$5,600 indicative cost exposure per lot, moderate band

The public record is a pre-screen, not the strata report. Read on for the detail, then obtain a strata records search before you bid.

Public record checked

Litigation, building-work orders, and governance for this scheme, the page you are on.
Read the strata report →
Paste the section 184 strata search or AGM minutes to see the fund balance and red flags the public registers can't. Obtain a strata records search if you do not have it yet.
Questions to ask
The specific questions this scheme's record raises, ready for the strata manager or your conveyancer.
Decide

Take the public record and the report findings to your conveyancer before you bid.

Risk read

What the public record shows for this scheme, read for a buyer. This is not the strata report, and a quiet record is not a guarantee: obtain a strata records search before you bid.

5 litigation matters on record

Tribunal and court decisions naming this scheme as a party. A litigious building is more likely to be carrying unresolved disputes, defects, or levy fights.

Cost exposure

Moderate exposure

An indicative, itemised estimate of what one lot here could face, built only from this scheme's public-record signals. Indicative ranges, not this building's actual figures, and not financial advice.

Good case $700 per lot

Expected $5,600 per lot

Worst case $21,900 per lot

Your lot's share versus an average lot 1.0×

Special levies are apportioned by unit entitlement. Set this from your contract; 1.0× is an average lot.

Exposure drivers, indicative per-lot ranges
Driver	Good	Expected	Worst
Tribunal and legal costs 5 tribunal or court matters on the public record. Indicative per-lot share of tribunal and legal costs in a strata dispute (NCAT). Scaled for: 5 matters.	$700	$5,600	$21,900
Total per lot	$700	$5,600	$21,900

Estimate only. Figures are indicative ranges from public remediation programs and reporting, apportioned to one lot; they are not this building's costed works and not financial advice. Obtain the capital works fund balance, any special levy resolved or proposed, and a strata records search before you transact.

Questions to ask before you bid

1
What by-laws apply to pets, parking, short-stay letting, and renovations, and have any been disputed?

Because we found a by-law matter on record.
2
What is the capital works (sinking) fund balance, its adequacy ratio, and the 10-year plan?
3
Are any special levies raised, proposed, or scoped-but-not-yet-levied?
4
Can I see the last two years of AGM minutes, including any motions that were defeated?

Ask about this building

Ask a plain-English question and we'll answer from our record: litigation, building-work orders, water and defect matters, the managing agent, and more.

Save scheme Add to list Monitor

Save keeps this scheme on your dashboard. Monitoring tracks the matter count from 5 today; we'll flag new matters here as they appear.

Building record

Strata plan CTS 19671 is on the register.

Location not mapped for this scheme yet. Map coverage is New South Wales today. Open the full map.

Litigation

Kookaburra Park Eco Village [2022] QBCCMCmr 91
Management and meetings QBCCMCmr 11 March 2022

COMMITTEE – VACANCY – EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING – where 5 of 7 committee members progressively resigned – where the remaining committee appointed the treasurer also as chairperson – where the remaining committee called an EGM to fill the other vacant positions but not to contest the chairperson position – whether the chairperson’s appointment was valid – where the EGM resulted in a committee constituted by 2 persons occupying 3 executive positions and 5 persons occupying 5 ordinary positions – whether the new composition of the committee is lawful – where all willing committee candidates are now elected to the committee – whether to order another EGM for new committee elections. Standard Module, s 48
Kookaburra Park Eco Village [2021] QBCCMCmr 553
Other QBCCMCmr 2 December 2021

INTERIM ORDER – BALANCE OF CONVENIENCE – COMMITTEE VACANCY – COMMITTEE ELECTION – where 5 of 7 committee members resigned – where remaining members were less than a quorum and EGM is required to fill vacancies – where remaining committee appointed one of the remaining members as chairperson and called EGM to fill vacancies – where EGM does not propose to fill position of chairperson – whether to make interim order to stop EGM proceeding – where balance of convenience lies. Act, s 279; Standard Module, ss 48, 51
Kookaburra Park Eco Village [2021] QBCCMCmr 281
By-laws QBCCMCmr 8 June 2021

BY-LAWS – whether opposition to a motion proposing a new by-law was unreasonable - Whether a motion proposing a by-law banning dogs and cats should be deemed carried. Act, ss 94, 169, 180, 276,
Kookaburra Park Eco Village [2020] QBCCMCmr 58
By-laws QBCCMCmr 11 February 2020

BY-LAWS – whether a pet by-law is invalid because it prohibits cats and dogs. Act, ss 169(1)(b), 180(7).
Kookaburra Park Eco Village [2020] QBCCMCmr 38
Repairs and common property QBCCMCmr 28 January 2020

MAINTENANCE – whether the body corporate is maintaining common property in good condition – whether the body corporate should be required to obtain an arborist report ever six months on a tree. Act, s 270, Standard Module, s 159

Decisions naming this scheme as a party, from QBCCMCmr via AustLII. The line beneath each matter is the decision's own catchwords, quoted; the topic tag is our grouping of those words and reads "Other" when they do not clearly fit, so you can always check it against the source. Every matter links to the full decision. Whether a matter helped or hurt the scheme is not assessed here.

Evidence ledger

Litigation-only record: this scheme is on file because a tribunal matter named its plan number, with no registry address, parcel, or map.

Evidence ledger: what was checked, what it found, how strong the match, and when it was last checked.
Checked	Found	Match	Last checked
Registry and parcel	Land registry	Stub only	Not harvested here yet
Governance: AGM, managing agent, annual reporting	Not yet checked	Not matched	Not harvested here yet
Litigation: NCAT and courts	5 matters	Direct	Not harvested here yet
Levies and financials	Not yet checked	Not matched	Not in the public record
Defects and building-work orders	Outside current coverage	Not matched	Not harvested here yet
Fund balances, current levies, minutes, defects not yet litigated	Not on the public record, and no registry entry for this scheme	Not matched	Never in the public record

What was checked, what it found, how strong the match, and when each source last ran. A source that has not run here yet reads as not checked, never as checked and clear. The unknowns the public registers structurally cannot show stay named, so silence above is never read as a clean bill.

Deep report · coming soon

On top of the public record above, the deep report will add the scheme's minutes, financials, capital-works fund, and a defect inspection. We're building it. Leave your email and we'll tell you when it's ready.