Decisions table

BY-LAW CONTRAVENTION – whether the respondent has installed curtains in breach of the by-law. Act, ss 182-188

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

BY-LAW CONTRAVENTION – whether the respondents have installed curtains in breach of the by-law. Act, ss 182-188

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

• The Owners - Strata Plan No. 58615 owners corp
• Herlina Almin lot owner

The applicant failed to establish that the respondent was feeding wild birds on her lot or common property, and proceedings were dismissed.

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDERS – whether the body corporate should be prevented from further spending on attempts to correct an unauthorised allocation of common property for the exclusive use of two lots pending a final decision as to whether a new community management statement must be recorded to correct the anomaly. Act, ss 62(2)&(3)(a), 94(1)(a), 279(1); Standard Module, ss 160, 162(2), 172.

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.

SAME ISSUE MOTIONS RULING MOTION OUT OF ORDER - WHETHER MOTION WAS IN CONFLICT WITH ACT, REGULATION OR BY-LAWS – whether otherwise void or unenforceable for another reason – where meeting not informed how ruling could be reversed. Act, Act, ss 276, 279. Accommodation Module, ss 79, 88

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

• Neville Marinko lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 7596 owners corp

The appeal was allowed and the Tribunal's dismissal of the application for appointment of a compulsory strata manager was set aside with the proceedings remitted for redetermination.

REASONABLENESS – where applicant lot owners enjoyed de facto exclusive use of garden areas adjacent to their lots – where body corporate defeated applicants’ motions for exclusive use and improvements to common property – whether decisions were unreasonable Act, s 94(2)

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

Whether the body corporate has acted to enforce a by-law; whether the body corporate has enforced a by-law in the way provided under the Act; whether the respondent contravened a by-law; whether the body corporate has acted reasonably enforcing a by-law. Act, ss 94, 100, 182, 183.

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

SPENDING – RECORDS – where services contractor apparently engaged without a committee or body corporate resolution – whether to make order to stop further engagement of contractor Act, s 276; Small Scheme Module, s 146

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

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

INTERIM ORDER – where committee passed resolution requiring owners to remove storage units from basement or face dispute resolution proceedings – whether circumstances warrant interim order‑ to stop implementation of resolution Act, s 276

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

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 77559 owners corp
• Mounir Touma lot owner

The Appeal Panel allowed both appeals in part, set aside the first instance orders, and remitted the matter to determine whether the lot owner is entitled to damages under s 106(5) of the SSMA and what orders should be made regarding damage to common property and consequential damage to lot property.

Validity of CMS; validity of specific by-laws; application that is frivolous, vexatious, misconceived and without substance. Act, ss 62, 64, 94(2), 169, 171, 172, 180, 270; Standard Module, ss 52, 58

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

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 63607 owners corp
• Michael Kinsella lot owner

The Appeal Panel dismissed the owners corporation's appeal and upheld the primary member's order requiring the owners corporation to pay the lot owner $1,085 for 2019 repair costs to double-glazed windows that were common property.

COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT STATEMENT – where body corporate failed to lodge a request to record a new CMS within the legislated 3 month period – where lot owner seeks order to extend the time for lodging the CMS – whether to make such an order Act, s 65

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

PROPERTY DAMAGE – whether an incorrectly installed air conditioner in a lot above caused water damage to a lot ceiling; whether the owner of the lot above should pay reimbursement for repairs to the ceiling; whether that owner should also reimburse the applicant’s conciliation and adjudication application fees. Act, ss 280, 281; Accommodation Module, s 201(3).

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

• EKG Pastries Pty Ltd lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No. 87145 owners corp

By-law 29 was declared invalid on the grounds that it breached section 83(2) of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 by imposing differential water usage charges not proportionate to the lot owner's unit entitlement.

MAINTENANCE OF COMMON PROPERTY – whether a paved area of common property used by a lot for outdoor restaurant seating is in good condition; whether the body corporate must restore its condition. Accommodation Module, s 170(1).

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

IMPROVEMENT TO COMMON PROPERTY – where the occupier of a lot installed a freezer on an exclusive use area of common property - where the applicant sought approval for the installation – whether the body corporate failed to act reasonably in refusing approval – whether the freezer should be authorised. Act, s 94(2); Commercial Module, s 140

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

EMERGENCY – SPENDING – whether to make order to authorise spending by committee for an amount beyond its spending limit and without a body corporate resolution on the basis of emergency Act, s 243A; Standard Module, s 172(1)(c)

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

MEETING NOTICE – whether the body corporate can hold an extraordinary general meeting without 21 days’ notice. Act, s 276; Accommodation Module, s 81

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

BY-LAW ENFORCEMENT – where a by-law requires approval for renovations to a lot – where the respondents installed a security screen door without approval – whether the security screen door should be removed Act, ss 94, 182, 184

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.

• Antoine Ghosn lot owner
• The Owners - Strata Plan No 87837 owners corp

The appeal was dismissed and the Tribunal's decision declining to appoint a compulsory strata manager was upheld, with the stay on orders lifted.

GENERAL MEETING PROCEDURES – whether the body corporate can hold its annual general meeting outside the legislative time limit. Standard Module, s 83

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

LAND LAW – Strata schemes – Proposed common property rights by-law – Whether unreasonably refused

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

APPEALS – errors other than errors of law – no question of principle

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

AGM RESOLUTION; MAINTENANCE – whether the body corporate may refuse to maintain a grease trap on common property, or deny access to it, if the owners who use it do not agree to pay its costs of operation; whether an AGM resolution that made use of the grease trap conditional upon entering into an agreement with the body corporate to pay a share of the grease trap’s costs of operation was valid. Act, ss 20(1), 35(1); Accommodation Module, ss 170(1)&(4), 200.

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

LAND LAW - strata title - application under s 236 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW) for an order allocating unit entitlements among the strata scheme lots - consideration of factors other than market values of the lots. APPEALS - exercise of discretionary power-errors of law-taking account of irrelevant considerations

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

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 84674 owners corp
• Pafburn Pty Limited builder
• Madarina Pty Limited developer

The Court decided that a person having substantive control over construction work includes the owner of the land, and that substantive control means having the ability to control how work is carried out rather than actually exercising such control; motions regarding amendment and dismissal were deferred pending further procedural steps.

• Anthony Reginald James Brenchley lot owner
• Mark Lambell lot owner
• Jenny Lambell lot owner
• Adam Severin lot owner
• Ann Marie Connery lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 80609 owners corp
• Keith Barry Clissold lot owner

The Court made no order as to costs between the plaintiffs and second defendant, with each party to bear their own costs, and no order as to costs for the first defendant; the strata scheme was terminated and the owners corporation wound up due to the building being uninhabitable.

COMMUNICATION – where the applicant objects to the contents of a body corporate memorandum and newsletter – whether the body corporate breached the legislation – whether the communications should be retracted – COSTS – whether the body corporate should pay the application fees. Act, ss 94(2), 280; Schedule 1A

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

BY-LAWS; NUISANCE – whether an occupier is causing a nuisance or otherwise contravening a residential zone activity by-law by feeding wild birds. Act, s 96A(6).

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

Whether the body corporate may hold its AGM later than permitted by the Accommodation Module. Act, s 227; Accommodation Module, s 73.

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

BODY CORPORATE PROPERTY – whether the body corporate has validly requested the return of body corporate property - whether the respondent has failed to comply with the request. Accommodation Module, s 224

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.

• The Owners – Strata Plan No. 61285 owners corp
• Cameron Taylor lot owner

The Tribunal found that the respondent contravened the June 2021 order by failing to complete required work items 1-7 and 9, with the matter relisted to determine whether a civil penalty should be imposed and the amount.

General Meeting – whether resolution could fetter decision made at a general meeting several years later Restricted Issue – whether submission of a motion to a general meeting was a restricted issue for the committee Notice of General Meeting – material circulated by committee in support of motion – whether sufficient information provided Act, ss 94, 101; Accommodation Module, ss 11, 44, 58, 69, 76, 88, 106, 219 South Pacific Plaza [[2001] QBCCMCmr 255](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QBCCMCmr/2001/255.html "View Case") Castaway Cove [[2006] QBCCMCmr 452](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QBCCMCmr/2006/452.html "View Case") Palm Springs Residences v J Patterson Holdings P/L [](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QDC/2008/300.html "View Case")[[2008] QDC 300](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QDC/2008/300.html "View Case"), Batwing Resorts Pty Ltd v Body Corporate for Liberty [[2008] QCCT 23](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QCCTBCCM/2008/23.html "View Case") Gold Coast Apartment Management P/L v Price [[2017] QCATA 99.](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QCATA/2017/99.html "View Case")

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

• Roger Harris lot owner
• The Owners-Strata Plan No 34056 owners corp

The Owners-Strata Plan No 34056's application for costs against the lot owner was dismissed as no special circumstances warranting an award of costs were established.

Responsibility for cost of making core hole penetration fire compliant – whether interim order preventing body corporate from undertaking work and on-charging owner should be granted. Act, s 279; Accommodation Module, ss 170, 177

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

Whether the committee complied with a scheme by-law; whether a by-law authorises an owner to make a stated improvement to common property. Act, ss 94, 100, 170, 173; Standard Module, s 193.

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

Whether a motion had to be decided by resolution without dissent; whether there is good reason to waive noncompliance with the time limit prescribed in section 242 of the Act; whether it is just and equitable in the circumstances to make an order in the terms sought; whether it is appropriate to make an ancillary order. Act, ss 62, 171, 242, 276, 284.

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.

Whether unauthorised improvements to common property should be removed. Act, s 168; Standard Module, s 187

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

INTERIM ORDER – whether interim orders are warranted. Act, s 279

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

ANIMAL BY-LAW – whether the applicant should be given approval to keep a dog at the scheme. Act, ss 94(2),100(5)

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

Whether the body corporate acted reasonably making a decision; whether the body corporate’s decision about a proposal by an owner to make improvements on or changes to common property was an unreasonable decision. Act, s 94, Schedule 5 s 17; Commercial Module, s 134.

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

IMPROVEMENTS TO COMMON PROPERTY – whether a new doorway and relocated air conditioning condenser are improvements to common property requiring body corporate approval; whether they were installed in contravention of the by-laws; whether various non-fixtures within and around an exclusive use area are improvements requiring body corporate approval; whether the correct exclusive use allocation is the 29m2 shown in an earlier community management statement or the 26m2 shown in the current one; whether the respondents must apply for general meeting approval for their improvements; whether they must remove the improvements if approval is not obtained. Accommodation Module, ss 177, 183, 202.

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

NUISANCE – BY-LAW – whether the respondent is causing a nuisance or is in breach of the noise by-law by virtue of the vinyl flooring installed in his lot – whether the flooring should be replaced. Act, s 167

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