Decisions table

JURISDICTION – whether there is a dispute – application to approve a quote for maintenance work – where there is no evidence any quotes have been put to the body corporate before making the application Act, ss 270, 276

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

IMPROVEMENTS TO COMMON PROPERTY - where improvements were made several years ago, before transfer to the current owners – whether body corporate approval for the improvements was given. EXCLUSIVE USE – where there has been a history of each owner maintaining common property on their ‘side’ of the scheme – whether the body corporate should record a grant of exclusive use for each owner. GENERAL MEETING MOTION – where a motion proposed to record a new community management statement to grant each of the owners exclusive use of an area of common property - where the motion failed to achieve a resolution without dissent – whether the dissenting vote was unreasonable in the circumstances. Act, ss 94(2), 276(1), Schedule 5, Item 10

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

IMPROVEMENTS TO COMMON PROPERTY - where improvements were made several years ago before transfer to the current owners – whether body corporate approval for the improvements was given. EXCLUSIVE USE – where there has been a history of each owner maintaining common property on their ‘side’ of the scheme – whether the body corporate should record a grant of exclusive use for each owner. GENERAL MEETING MOTION – where a motion proposed to record a new community management statement to grant each of the owners exclusive use of an area of common property - where the motion failed to achieve a resolution without dissent – whether the dissenting vote was unreasonable in the circumstances. Act, ss 94(2), 276(1), Schedule 5, Item 10

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

ANIMAL BY-LAW – whether by-laws limiting weight and number of animals prohibitive or regulatory – whether by-laws limiting weight and number of animals unreasonable – whether body corporate acted unreasonably in refusing to approve two dogs in a general meeting decision – whether reasonable conditions could manage risks to other owners and occupiers – conditions included in general meeting motion Act, ss 94, 169, 180

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BY-LAWS – where a by-law in a duplex prohibits one lot from being used as a real estate agency without the consent of the other lot owner - whether the by-law goes beyond regulating the use and enjoyment of the lot; whether the by-law is oppressive or unreasonable; whether the applicant is estopped from bringing the application. Act, ss 169, 180(7)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

MAINTENANCE of UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE – whether body corporate has failed to maintain overland water flow drainage infrastructure in good condition; whether the body corporate must perform drainage works to common property site wide to reduce overland flows into courtyards and lots FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT – whether body corporate’s administrative and sinking fund budgets are adequate. Act, ss 20(1), 94(1)(a) & (2), 100(5), 152, 159; Standard Module, 160

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

IMPROVEMENT TO COMMON PROPERTY – where lot owner proposed a motion at a general meeting for authorisation to replace aluminium balustrade with a glass balustrade, whether body corporate acted reasonably in deciding not to approve the motion. Act, s 94(2); Standard Module, s 187

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

Owners Corporations

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

REASONABLENESS; GENERAL MEETING RESOLUTIONS – where a general meeting voted to change the opening hours of an automatic gate that allows vehicles to enter the car park – where the applicant proposed alternative opening hours that would have better suited his tenant’s business but his motion failed – whether the body corporate acted unreasonably – whether the applicant’s motion should be given effect. Act, ss 94(1)(a)&(2), 270(1)(c)&(3).

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• Anne Casey lot owner
• Renfay Projects Pty Ltd builder
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 586 owners corp

All three appeals by Anne Casey against the Primary Decision, Work Order Decision, and Costs Decision were dismissed, with the Appeal Panel finding no procedural unfairness and no errors of law in the tribunal's original determinations.

BY-LAWS – whether pattern of communication amounts to unreasonable interference – whether additional orders restricting methods of communication appropriate – whether guide, hearing, or assistance animal exempt from keeping of animals by-law. Act, ss 94, 184

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

RECORDS – whether the body corporate failed to provide body corporate records to the applicant. Act, s 205; Accommodation Module, ss 220, 222

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

IMPROVEMENT TO COMMON PROPERTY – where the body corporate removed steps that had been installed by the applicant on common property – whether the body corporate must reinstate the steps. Act, ss 94, 100; Standard Module, ss 186, 187

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• Ned Abraham lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 61419 owners corp
• BlueHouseCoffs Pty Ltd manager
• Arthur George Bilski lot owner
• Wojceich Marek Bilski lot owner

The appeal was dismissed as incompetent because Ned Abraham, a lot owner, lacked standing to appeal on behalf of the Owners Corporation after a compulsory strata manager with plenary powers was appointed, and the appointed manager did not ratify the appeal.

FINANCIAL YEAR – whether the financial year end date for the body corporate should be changed Act, s283

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

PROPERTY DAMAGE – where the applicant’s lot was damaged by water entering through a window and an expansion joint in a wall separating the lot from common property - whether the body corporate must reimburse the applicant for repairs, lost rental income, and interest on those amounts. Act, ss 276(1), 281; Accommodation Module, s 170(1)&(2)(a)(ii).

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

JURISDICTION – whether adjudicator has exclusive and sole jurisdiction in the first instance – whether application should be dismissed so it may be heard in a court of competent jurisdiction. MAINTENANCE – whether body corporate or lot owner responsible for maintaining the floor of a lot – whether a joint is part of the floor for which the body corporate is responsible – whether defects in construction of floor make the floor structurally unsound – whether body corporate contravened the Act by breaching its duty to maintain – whether lot owner should be reimbursed for expenses incurred relating to the contravention. Act, ss 152, 229(3), 270(1)(b), 276, 281; Accommodation Module, s 170

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

NOISE – where the applicant reports noise and vibration from utility infrastructure in the building – whether the body corporate has failed to meet its obligations – whether orders are warranted. Act, ss 20, 94, 167; Accommodation Module, ss 170, 176, 177

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BY-LAWS – whether the lot owner is contravening a noise by-law with the use of the lot above or creating an unreasonable interference with the use of the lot above Act, ss 167, 185

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

RECORDS – where the applicant seeks body corporate records –whether the body corporate has failed to comply with its statutory obligation to provide records – whether body corporate has acted reasonably. Act, ss 94(2), 100(5), 205, Standard Module s 166(5)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

EMERGENCY EXPENDITURE – where the committee has sought authorisation for expenditure in excess of the relevant committee spending limit – whether the circumstances constitute an ‘emergency’ and the expenditure should be authorised Act, s 20; Accommodation Module, ss 81, 162, 170

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

MAINTENANCE; IMPROVEMENT TO LOT – where the respondent removed vegetation from his lot and proposes to install a fence along the boundary with the applicant’s lot – whether the work contravened a by-law, a covenant for the protection of habitat, the architectural and landscape code in the community management statement, the scheme’s development approval, the Planning Act 2016, or caused a nuisance – whether the respondent must reinstate his lot to its former condition. Act, s 276(1); Standard Module, ss 180(1)&(7), 211(2)-(3).

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

MAINTENANCE – whether the body corporate acted unreasonably in accepting a quote to bypass rather than repair utility infrastructure – whether the body corporate is liable for necessary damage caused by maintaining the common property – whether the body corporate is required to give notice of intended entry. Act, ss 20, 94, 163, 177, 280, 281; Accommodation Module, ss 170

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

GENERAL MEETING PROCEDURES – whether notice of annual general meeting validly given – whether voters present personally at a general meeting sufficient for quorum – whether irregularities in meeting procedure disenfranchised a voter – whether meeting should be declared void for irregularity. Standard Module, ss 87, 99, 100

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

INTERIM ORDER; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; REASONABLENESS – where the applicant claims the body corporate resolved to engage a contractor above the major spending limit without considering two quotations – where the applicant claims the contractor does not hold the required QBCC licence – whether the body corporate should be prevented from engaging the contractor prior to final orders. Act, ss 94(2), 279(1); Standard Module, s 173.

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT – whether the respondents are relevant persons – whether an adjudicator has jurisdiction to determine the application. Act, ss 150, 239C, 270(1)(e); Standard Module, s 166

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

GENERAL MEETING RESOLUTION – whether a resolution to engage a utilities service contractor was valid - where proposed expenditure exceeded Relevant Limit for Major Spending – whether two quotations required. Act, ss 94, 276; Accommodation Module, s 163

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

Utility infrastructure – where a drain located on common property is blocked – whether the drain is a body corporate responsibility to maintain – whether the committee’s decision to refuse reimbursement to unblock the drain was unreasonable. Act, ss 20, 94(2); Accommodation Module, ss 170(4)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BODY CORPORATE RECORDS – whether the body corporate must provide in-person inspection of records – whether records available on demand via a digital platform is the body corporate giving copies. Act, s 250

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BY-LAWS / REASONABLENESS – where the applicant alleges residents at the scheme are parking in contravention of the scheme’s vehicle by-law – whether an order that the body corporate enforce the by-law is warranted in the circumstances. Act, ss 31, 59, 94, 100, 185

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• Ms Simone Selkirk lot owner
• The Owners - Strata Plan No 2661 owners corp

The appeal was allowed against the owners corporation and the matter was remitted for re-determination on the scope of work required to fulfil the owners corporation's strict duty to maintain and repair common property in the appellant's bathroom and the amount of rent and losses from 5 December 2020.

BY-LAWS – whether noise amounts to unreasonable interference –applicant’s obligation to prove application – limited evidence of material impact Act, ss 59, 94, 167, 180

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

MAINTENANCE/PROPERTY DAMAGE – where the applicant alleges the respondent failed to maintain his lot and this led to the applicant’s lot sustaining water damage and requiring repairs – whether the respondent should be ordered to reimburse the applicant for the repairs. Act, ss 20, 252E(5); Accommodation Module, ss 170, 201

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

Scheme dispute - Whether horizontal lower boundary of balcony is upper surface of the tiled floor or upper surface of concrete slab

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

EMERGENCY EXPENDITURE– whether the body corporate committee should be granted permission to undertake emergency expenditure Act, s243A; Accommodation Module, ss 162, 187, 188

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• Malcom Reid lot owner
• Leonie Palmer lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No. 5362 owners corp
• Peter Bonello lot owner
• Catherine Munayer lot owner
• John Wynne lot owner
• David Withers lot owner

The application for appointment of a compulsory strata manager under s237 and removal of strata committee members under s238 was dismissed.

ANIMAL BY-LAW – where a by-law requires body corporate approval to keep pets at the scheme; where approval for one cat was granted and subsequently rescinded due to breaches of the committee’s conditions of approval, and approval for a second cat was never granted; whether the respondent must comply with the conditions of approval or remove her cats from the scheme. Act, ss 59(2)(b), 94.

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• The Owners – Strata Plan No. 20548 owners corp
• Mount Street 4 Pty Ltd atf Mount Street 4 Unit Trust developer
• Keith Anthony Bond lot owner

The court dismissed the applicant's motion to join 15 dissenting lot owners to the proceedings for the purpose of the conciliation conference only, finding the statutory scheme for strata renewal plans prescriptive and comprehensive with adequate notice provisions, and that joinder was not necessary or of utility.

BODY CORPORATE PROPERTY – whether the body corporate has an obligation to provide occupier with keys to common property doors at no cost; whether the body corporate acted unreasonably. Act, ss94, 270

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

INTERIM ORDERS – where affected persons have made a request that interim orders are cancelled, whether adjudicator has jurisdiction and remains satisfied interim orders are warranted. Act, ss 94(2), 279

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

INTERIM ORDERS – whether interim orders are warranted in the circumstances. ADJUDICATOR POWERS – whether Adjudicator can be satisfied that an application raises a serious legal question and the balance of convenience between the parties justifies injunctive relief. SDW2 Pty Ltd v JLF Corporation Pty Ltd [[2017] QSC 001](/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=%5b2017%5d%20QSC%20001 "View LawCiteRecord") Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill [[2006] HCA 46](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2006/46.html "View Case") Act, ss 94(1), 100(5), 279 Standard Module, s 180.

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

INTERIM ORDER – where body corporate resolved to carry out works to common property – where applicant challenges validity of the decision – whether interim order should be granted in the circumstances. Act, s279(1)

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

MOTION – BODY CORPORATE MANAGER – where a motion to engage a body corporate manager did not provide two or more tenders – whether two or more tenders are required by the BUGT Act for a motion to engage a body corporate manager – where the schedule of fees and charges in the executed body corporate manager agreement was varied from the proposed agreement, but apparently in favour of the body corporate – whether to declare the resolution to adopt the agreement was invalid GENERAL MEETING – VOTING – where voting papers were invited and accepted by email – whether emailed votes may be valid under the legislation – whether an ordinary resolution is required to authorise voting by email GENERAL MEETING – QUORUM – where a general meeting proceeded allegedly without a quorum – whether to order that the motion decided at the meeting is void GENERAL MEETING – VOTING – CONFLICT OF INTEREST – where committee member who proposed a motion to engage a body corporate manager voted on the motion – whether there was a conflict of interest GENERAL MEETING – VOTING – CONFLICT OF INTEREST – where body corporate manager ran a general meeting and counted votes on a motion to engage them – whether there was a conflict of interest Act, ss 47(1), 50; Schedule 2, Part 2, ss 3 and 5

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BY-LAWS – where the applicant alleges the respondent is parking on the common property without approval – where the applicant alleges invitees of the respondent are parking on the common property without approval – whether this amounts to a contravention of the by-laws – whether orders are warranted. Act, ss 185, 280.

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

ANIMAL BY-LAW – whether an order should be made requiring the removal of dogs from a lot. Act, s 270(1)(e).

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BY-LAWS; REASONABLENESS – whether a by-law prohibiting short-term and holiday letting is invalid and should be removed from the community management statement; whether the body corporate acted unreasonably when refusing to consent to an owner’s application to the local government for a material change of use to allow short-term letting. Act, ss 94(2), 100(5), 180(3)&(4).

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

BODY CORPORATE RECORDS – whether the ability to access a body corporate’s financial institution account is a record – whether financial reports that have not been created are body corporate records – where body corporate otherwise failed to permit applicant to inspect body corporate records – whether application appears to be frivolous, vexatious, misconceived, or without substance. Act, ss 205, 270.

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

CHANGE OF FINANCIAL YEAR – whether an order should be made to change the body corporate’s financial year end date. Act, s 283

On the tribunal register; not yet read into parties, outcome, and amount. Read the source decision.

• The Owners - Strata Plan No 97315 owners corp
• Icon Co (NSW) Pty Ltd builder

The court ordered that there be no order as to the costs of the reference, with each party bearing its own costs, because neither party established the case for which it primarily contended on the sunshade defects issue.

• The Owners-Strata Plan No 53865 owners corp
• JPG Investments Pty Ltd lot owner
• Conrad Corporation Pty Ltd lot owner

The appeal of the owners corporation against the Tribunal's order requiring it to consent to the lot owners' development application for construction of additional storeys was dismissed, with the original Tribunal orders upheld.