Strata scheme CTS 5458
CTS 5458 Queensland
Verdict
Public record: 6 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.
Cost exposure
Indicative, itemised estimate of what one average 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.
Elevated- $25,000
Serious building-defect rectification
Indicative per-lot serious-defect rectification levies (NSW Serious Defects in Residential Apartments research report, 2021; strata special-levy reporting). Scaled for: 1 matter.
- $6,300
Tribunal and legal costs
Indicative per-lot share of tribunal and legal costs in a strata dispute (NCAT). Scaled for: 6 matters.
Litigation · 6 matters
Bayview Tower [2026] QBCCMCmr 71
Repairs and common property QBCCMCmr 10 March 2026
MAINTENANCE – where body corporate undertakes repair work to an existing building on common property – whether maintenance or improvement – type of resolution required for approval. IMPROVEMENTS TO COMMON PROPERTY – where body corporate extended roof of building and concreted surrounding area – where motion put to general meeting incorrectly referred to approval by ordinary resolution instead of special resolution. REQUIREMENTS FOR VOTING PAPERS – where voting paper incorrectly referred to “ordinary resolution” instead of special resolution. Act, s 159, 276. Standard Module ss 88, 186 Oceana on Broadbeach v 21 Broadbeach Blvd P/L [[2025] QSC 68](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QSC/2025/68.html "View Case")
Bayview Tower [2025] QBCCMCmr 33
Repairs and common property QBCCMCmr 3 February 2025
REASONABLENESS; COMMITTEE RESOLUTION – whether the committee acted unreasonably when refusing to grant approval for the respondent’s dog to reside at the scheme, where residents have medical conditions; ASSISTANCE DOG – definition; right to keep on lot or common property. Act, ss 100(5); 169B, 181; Guide, Hearing and Assistance Dogs Act 2009
Bayview Tower [2023] QBCCMCmr 473
Management and meetings QBCCMCmr 30 November 2023
REASONABLENESS; COMMITTEE RESOLUTION – whether the committee acted unreasonably when refusing to grant approval for the applicant’s dogs to reside at the scheme – whether the committee’s decision should be reversed. Act, ss 4(a), 100(5), 179.
Bayview Tower [2023] QBCCMCmr 324
By-laws QBCCMCmr 22 August 2023
APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDERS – where permission to keep two dogs in a lot was refused by the body corporate committee pursuant to the scheme’s pet by-law; where the applicant intends to relocate to the scheme soon; whether the committee acted unreasonably when refusing to permit the dogs at the scheme; whether the dogs should be permitted on an interim basis until the application can be determined. Act, ss 100(5), 279(1).
Bayview Tower [2023] QBCCMCmr 123
Other QBCCMCmr 22 March 2023
DISPUTE – whether a dispute exist for adjudication. Act, s 276
Bayview Tower [2022] QBCCMCmr 161
Repairs and common property QBCCMCmr 27 April 2022
MAINTENANCE – in building format plan –whether the body corporate is responsible for the cost of repairs to a balcony which is part of a lot Act ss 152, 227, 228, 276, 281; Standard Module ss 180, 211, 187. Building Code of Australia, AS4654 Seiwa Pty Ltd v The Owners Strata Plan 35042 [](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2006/1157.html "View Case")[[2006] NSWSC 1157](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2006/1157.html "View Case") Klinger & Anor v Body Corporate for Costa D’Ora [](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QDC/2007/300.html "View Case")[[2007] QDC 300.](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QDC/2007/300.html "View Case") Amelia Place [[2010] QBCCMCmr 522](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QBCCMCmr/2010/522.html "View Case") Les Colonnades [[2015] QBCCMCmr 173](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QBCCMCmr/2015/173.html "View Case")
Decisions naming this scheme, from QBCCMCmr via AustLII. The quoted line beneath each is the decision's own catchwords; the topic tag is our grouping of those words. 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.
| 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 | 6 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.