Decisions table

Owners Corporations

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

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 77109 owners corp
• Gokani-Robins Pty. Ltd. lot owner

The Appeal Panel made a costs order requiring the appellant to pay 20% of the respondent's costs of the stay application on the ordinary basis, finding special circumstances existed due to the appellant's late service of material but not warranting full indemnity costs.

INTERIM ORDER – whether to grant an interim order. Act, s 269

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

INTERIM ORDER – whether an interim order is warranted. Act, s 269

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

Whether emergency circumstances exist. Act, ss 227, 229, 243A, 276, 312; Accommodation Module s 81.

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

Responsibility for cost of making core hole penetration in common property roof fire compliant. Act, s 280; Accommodation Module, ss 170, 177

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

GENERAL MEETING – NOTICE PERIOD – whether to make order declaring that a general meeting in an emergency will not be invalid for being called on short notice. Act, s 243A; Accommodation Module, s 81

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

• Lewis Elliot Franklin lot owner
• The Owners—Strata Plan No. 87497 owners corp

Paragraphs (1) and (2) of by-law 25 prohibiting cooking in lots were declared invalid as harsh, unconscionable and oppressive, being an unjustified blanket ban on cooking that limits fundamental property rights without protecting other occupants' use and enjoyment.

INTERIM ORDER – whether an interim order is necessary because of the nature or urgency of the circumstances to which the application relates. ADJUDICATOR’S 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, s 279

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

Whether the body corporate maintained common property in good condition; whether the proposed spending is above the relevant limits for committee spending; whether the spending is required to meet an emergency. Act, ss 152, 243A; Accommodation Module, ss 162, 163, 170.

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

• The Owners - Strata Plan No 19341 owners corp
• Brian Charles Dehlsen lot owner

The Tribunal prescribed a common property rights by-law for the lot owner's 2005 renovations and ordered the respondent to waterproof the planter boxes within 3 months, but declined to find the work caused water penetration into lot 2.

BODY CORPORATE RECORDS – whether the body corporate failed to provide the applicant with records – GENERAL MEETING PROCEDURES – whether a meeting was validly called. Act, ss 205, 270(1)(e); Accommodation Module, ss 72, 82, 83

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

RECORDS – whether the body corporate has failed to comply with an obligation to provide access to records Act, ss 100(5) and 205; Standard Module, ss 231 - 233

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

EXCLUSIVE USE – whether the reallocation of an exclusive use car parking space was valid – whether the space should be allocated to the applicant – whether there is an encroachment onto a car parking space allocated to the applicant – whether a wall and pipework should be removed – MAINTENANCE – whether the body corporate has failed to maintain common property – TIME LIMIT – whether the time limit applying to part of the application should be waived - COSTS – whether costs should be awarded. Act, ss 242, 250, 270; Accommodation Module, s 170

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

INTERIM ORDERS – whether interim orders warranted. Act, s 279

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

STATUTORY EASEMENT – REASONABLENESS – where a lot owner proposed to install solar panels on the common property roof for the benefit of their lot – whether a statutory easement over common property for utility infrastructure to supply utility services exists and can be exercised by the lot owner – where the installation requires an ordinary resolution – whether the body corporate acted unreasonably in refusing approval. Act, ss 68, 69, 94, 159; Standard Module, s 187

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

Whether an interim order is necessary because of the nature or urgency of the circumstances to which the application relates. Act, s 279.

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

ANIMAL BY-LAW – whether the body corporate acted unreasonably in refusing to give permission to keep a dog Act, ss 94(2), 100(5)

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

Whether the committee had power to decide a request to install shutters; whether the body corporate and the committee acted reasonably. Act, ss 94, 100.

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

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 89005 owners corp
• Thomas Stromer lot owner
• Simone Stromer lot owner
• Nathan Stromer lot owner
• Farad Electric Co Pty Ltd builder
• Mondan Management Pty Ltd (in liq) t/as Vic Lilli & Partners party
• Peter Smith Constructions Pty Limited consultant

Paragraphs 20 to 33 of the cross-claim were struck out as defectively pleaded, but the cross-claimant was given a further opportunity to amend the pleading to properly allege negligence by identifying specific actions a reasonable building supervisor would have taken to avoid the relevant risks of harm.

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 95230 owners corp
• Stacey Maister lot owner
• Terry Maister lot owner
• Debby-Lee Maister lot owner

The Appeal Panel stayed Order 7 (ongoing damages for alternative accommodation) pending appeal determination but dismissed the application to stay the work orders for mould remediation and retiling.

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDERS – whether the body corporate should be prevented from putting a committee resolution and general meeting resolution into effect pending the outcome of a challenge to the validity of the meetings that passed them. Act, ss 119, 279(1), 309; Accommodation Module, ss 46, 47, 63(6)(e)(ii), 72(1), 77(3)(d), 102(4)(c), 130(1), 162, 163(1)(a).

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

INTERIM ORDER – whether an interim order is necessary because of the nature or urgency of the circumstances to which the application relates. ADJUDICATOR’S 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, s 279

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

ACCESS RIGHTS – COMMON PROPERTY – where scheme is a resort with mainly accommodation lots and some commercial lots – where motion passed to restrict access to unallocated parking spaces by a boom gate – where body corporate apparently intends to preference accommodation guests for parking access – there applicant says its business will be affected because its customers will have difficulty accessing parking INTERIM ORDER – whether interim order is warranted. Act, ss 35, 94, 171, 279

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

INTERIM ORDER – whether an interim order is warranted. Act, s 279

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

• Jessica Hetty Silberstein lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 55468 owners corp
• Michael Adamo party
• Peter Michael Hans Engelbert party
• William Paul O'Brien party
• Terrence Matthew Gagen party
• Strata choice Pty Ltd manager
• Hecker Australia Pty Ltd contractor

Paragraph 3 of the summons relating to documents concerning the respondents' knowledge of the applicant's husband's disability and health issues was set aside as lacking reasonable particularity and constituting a fishing expedition; Categories 1 and 2 relating to water ingress documents were not pressed by the applicant but the tribunal indicated the terms were too broad and problematic.

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDER – whether the body corporate should be prevented, pending final orders, from holding a general meeting to consider motions to amend the caretaking service contractor’s engagement and amalgamate part of the caretaker’s lot into common property; where the applicants challenge the validity of committee resolutions that resulted in the proposals to be put to the general meeting but do not seek any final orders with respect to the general meeting itself. Act, s 279(1).

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

BREACH OF BY-LAWS / IMPROVEMENTS – where the respondents have installed a security camera on common property without body corporate permission and failed to remove it after being served with a continuing contravention notice – whether the camera should be removed or relocated Act, ss 36, 59, 94, 182; Accommodation Module, ss 170, 177

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

Whether a part of scheme land is common property; whether an owner has a right to use common property to the exclusion of other owners and occupiers; whether the body corporate has acted in accordance with its statutory functions and duties. Act, ss 94, 152; Standard Module, s 187.

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

• Sunaust Properties Pty Ltd party
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 64807 owners corp

The Court dismissed the Owners Corporation's application to transfer proceedings from the Supreme Court to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal, finding that the Court's jurisdiction should be retained due to uncertainty regarding the Tribunal's jurisdictional scope, the substantial quantum of the claim (over $750,000 in unpaid fees plus claims for loss of profits around $3 million), and the estimated hearing time of 8-10 days which exceeded the Tribunal's capacity.

Costs; Owners Corporations

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

GENERAL MEETING PROCEDURES – where the owner of lots who signed a request for a general meeting withdrew agreement to the request - whether the notice requesting the meeting was valid at the time the meeting was called – whether there were other procedural defects with the calling of the meeting – GENERAL MEETING MOTIONS – whether motions included on the agenda were valid. Accommodation Module, ss 74, 77, 82, 83, 98, 101, 125, 127

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

REGULATION MODULE – where the community management statement states that the Accommodation Module applies to this scheme – whether the circumstances that must exist for the Accommodation Module to apply to this scheme actually exist – whether a new community management statement should be recorded stating that the Standard Module applies. Act, ss 21(3); Accommodation Module, s 3, Standard Module s 3

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

Whether interim order preventing resolutions carried at EGM from being implemented is warranted. Validity of EGM; validity of motions purportedly carried at EGM; composition of committee – whether valid; major spending – whether authorised. Act, s 279; Accommodation Module, ss 11(2), 36(2)(c), 40, 72(1), 163

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

CHANGE OF FINANCIAL YEAR – application to change the financial year end date of the Body Corporate Act, s 283

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

INTERIM ORDER – whether an interim order is necessary because of the nature or urgency of the circumstances to which the application relates. REFEREE 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, s 279

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

EXCLUSIVE USE BY-LAW – whether authorised allocations made within the base allocation period – whether the time to lodge a new community management statement recording authorised allocations should be extended. Act, ss 171, 174, 175

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

INTERIM ORDER – whether an interim order is necessary because of the nature or urgency of the circumstances to which the application relates. ADJUDICATOR’S 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, s 279

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

No 3; Building and Property

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

ACN: 130 534 244; Building and Property

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

ANIMAL BY-LAW – whether the body corporate acted unreasonably in refusing to give permission to allow a visiting dog Act, ss 94(2), 100(5)

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

BY-LAWS – where the applicant claims an occupier has breached various by-laws including by-laws relating to noise, obstruction, parking of vehicles and use of common property - whether the body corporate has failed to enforce the by-laws – whether orders are warranted. Act, ss 94, 100, 182-188

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

• Peter Robert McDonnell lot owner
• Janette Carolyn McDonnell lot owner
• Peter McDonnell Pty Ltd lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 64191 owners corp

Application to extend time to bring appeal is refused, summons dismissed, and plaintiffs ordered to pay defendant's costs.

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDERS – whether an owner should be prevented from removing trees or erecting a dividing fence prior to final orders; where questions have been posed about the work’s compliance with the by-laws, vegetation and fauna habitat covenants applying to the land, and the architectural and landscape code at schedule D of the community management statement. Act, s 279(1).

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

GENERAL MEETING – where voting papers contained mistakes, irregularities and were said to be misleading – whether to declare the meeting void. COSTS – where the application is dismissed for being frivolous, vexatious, misconceived or without substance – whether to award costs against the applicant. Act, section 270; Accommodation Module, s 80

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

Costs; Building and Property

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.

APPEAL – Interlocutory application

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

• Ross Harold Smith lot owner
• Jennifer Ann Smith lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No. 3004 owners corp

The Smiths' appeal was dismissed; the Magistrate's decision to limit loss of rent damages to three months was upheld as the Smiths failed to mitigate their loss by choosing not to rent the unit while repairs were undertaken, despite there being no safety concerns.

Owners Corporations

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