Decisions table

MAINTENANCE – whether the body corporate must restore the structural soundness of the applicant’s garage and reimburse her expenditure on an engineer. Standard Module, ss 180(2)(b), 211(3).

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 Act, ss 94(2), 279

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

INTERIM – 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.

INTERIM ORDERS – whether an interim order is warranted. Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (Qld): s 279

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

EXCLUSIVE USE – whether a resolution to record a new community management statement that omitted an exclusive use by-law was valid – whether the lot owner remains entitled to the exclusive use – whether motions to reinstate the exclusive use by-law should be deemed passed – TIME LIMIT – whether the application time limit should be waived. Act, ss 62, 170, 171, 242, item 10 of schedule 5

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

PROPERTY DAMAGE – where furniture from the respondent’s balcony damaged louvres on common property; whether the respondent must reimburse the applicant’s expenditure on repairs and bringing conciliation and adjudication applications. Act, ss 280, 281.

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

GENERAL MEETING MOTIONS - where the applicant is challenging motions passed at the scheme’s annual general meeting authorising repair works - whether the body corporate acted unreasonably in passing the motions. Act, ss 94, 100, 101B, 152, 270; Accommodation Module, ss 37, 163, 170, 187

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

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDERS – whether a motion to repair a car stacker should have given owners the choice of a second quotation; whether the cost of repairs should be levied on all owners or only those with exclusive use of a parking space in the car stacker; whether to prevent the implementation of these motions while the application is decided. Act, s 279; Accommodation Module, s 163.

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

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDER – where the applicant seeks to challenge a motion to engage an engineer passed at the scheme’s 2026 annual general meeting – whether there is a basis to restrain the body corporate from implementing the motion. Act, ss 94, 252E, 279

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

INTERIM ORDERS – whether interim orders are warranted and appropriate in the circumstances. Act, ss 94(2), 100(5), 163A, 180

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

GENERAL MEETING PROCEDURE – whether general discussion material was lawfully included in general meeting minutes – whether the minutes should be corrected. Act, ss 94(2), 270(1)(c); Standard Module, ss 63

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

ADMINISTRATOR – whether to appoint an administrator for three months to call and convene an annual general meeting. Act, s 205; Accommodation Module, ss 11(2)(c), 72(1).

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

MAINTENANCE – whether body corporate or lot owner responsible for maintaining external timber balconies that are, at least partially, within the boundaries of the lot; whether there is evidence the applicant caused or contributed to deterioration of the part of a lot; whether the committee acted reasonably in purporting to require the lot owner to contribute 75% of the cost of works to the balconies. Act, ss 94(2), 100(5), 152; Standard Module, ss 180(2)(b)(iii), 180(5)

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

MAINTENANCE – where the applicant had works carried out to replace the retaining wall and fence in their exclusive use courtyard – where the body corporate has not reimbursed the applicant for the cost of the work – whether orders are warranted. Act, s 94; Standard Module, s 192

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

ADMINISTRATOR – whether to appoint an administrator to pursue an owner’s compliance with previous adjudicator’s orders on behalf of the body corporate or to otherwise address dysfunction at the scheme.

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

IMPROVEMENT TO COMMON PROPERTY – BY-LAWS – whether the installation of a shade structure on an exclusive use area of common property required body corporate consent – whether a general meeting decision on the proposal was invalid or unreasonable – whether consent should be deemed to have been given. BUGT Act, ss 30, 37A

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

INTERIM ORDER – whether interim orders are warranted Act, s279

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

• Andrew Timothy Thompson lot owner
• The Owners – Strata Plan No 31007 owners corp

Thompson's appeal (2025/00109080) allowed and remitted for reconsideration of first instance costs; Thompson's appeal (2025/00113534) dismissed with costs ordered against him.

JURISDICTION – where the applicant has sold the lot, whether the outcomes sought are relevant or required. Act, s 270(1)(e)

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

BY-LAWS – MAINTENANCE – whether the addition of walls within a lot by a previous owner of the lot are in contravention of the by-laws and obligation to maintain the lot where they allegedly cause the fire sprinkler system to be non-complaint with other fire and building regulations – whether the installation of walls is a ‘structural alteration’ which requires body corporate consent pursuant to the by-laws. Act, ss 59, 184; Accommodation Module, s 201.

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

BY-LAWS; NUISANCE – whether the respondent’s altercations with a member of the body corporate committee breached by-laws or section 167 of the Act. Act, ss 167, 280, 281.

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

INTERIM ORDERS – whether interim orders are warranted and appropriate in the circumstances. Act, s 100(5); Standard Module, ss 52, 172, 174, and 186

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

INTERIM ORDER – whether to make an interim order in response to the applicants’ request to vary the dismissal of their application for interim orders. Act, ss 279(2)(b)

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

GENERAL MEETING MOTIONS – whether the decisions of the body corporate on several general meeting motions was unreasonable. Act, ss 94(2), 101B; Accommodation Module, ss 37, 76, 78, 80

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.

BY-LAWS; ARCHITECTURAL CODE – whether owners carried out works to their lot and adjoining common property in contravention of the by-laws and architectural code; whether the body corporate must pursue enforcement; whether the body corporate must attempt to recover the cost of remedial works to the common property from the owners. Act, ss 36(1), 94(1)(b), 100(2), 182; Accommodation Module, ss 44(1)(d), 170(1), 177.

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

• The Owners – Strata Plan no 85385 owners corp
• Annette Barnett lot owner
• Laura Lillas lot owner
• Tony Clarkson lot owner
• Kandiah Theivendren lot owner

The Appellant's appeal was dismissed on substantive grounds but partially succeeded on a costs procedural issue; the Respondents were ordered to be the successful parties overall, and the Appellant was ordered to pay 90% of the Respondents' appeal costs to reflect the mixed outcome.

INTERIM – 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.

IMPROVEMENT TO LOT; BY-LAWS; REASONABLENESS of COMMITTEE DECISIONS; - Whether committee decisions to refuse lot owner application to install transparent PVC blind on balcony within lot to prevent water penetration from rain were unreasonable; whether by-law applicable; whether by-law valid. Act, ss 94(2), 100(5)

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

INTERIM ORDER – whether there are urgent circumstances warranting an interim order BUGT Act, s76

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

TIME LIMIT – whether for good reason adjudicator should waive non-compliance with statutory time limits for making application; BUDGETS – where body corporate decided at a general meeting to adopt a sinking fund budget of $2,500 for its 2025 financial year whether the body corporate complied with its statutory obligations and failed to act reasonably in making financial management decisions; CONTRIBUTIONS – whether adjudicator is satisfied contributions levied on owners are unreasonable and that an order should be made increasing the contribution to a reasonable amount. Act, ss 94(2), 242, 276(3) and Schedule 5, Item 11; Standard Module, ss 160, 162 and 163

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

NUISANCE – form of final orders – quia timet relief – mandatory injunction conditional on plaintiff first obtaining easement from third-party neighbour – no issue of principle COSTS – costs for the event – plaintiff obtained some relief sought in statement of claim but not all – plaintiff entitled to 80% of its costs – no issue of principle

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

INTERIM ORDER; USE OF COMMON PROPERTY – whether an interim order should be made preventing an owner who does not occupy a lot within the scheme from using the common property driveway to access property external to the scheme. Act, ss 35, 279

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

BY-LAWS – whether the body corporate contravened the by-laws or did not enforce the by-laws regarding the installation of hard flooring in a lot. Act, ss 59, 94

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

EXCLUSIVE USE BY-LAW – whether a motion for a new exclusive use by-law attaching to a lot giving exclusive rights to use an area of common property failed to pass by resolution without dissent because of opposition that, in the circumstances, was unreasonable. Act, s 276(3) and Schedule 5 Item 10

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

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDERS – where a general meeting has been called to consider motions to remove two committee members and install a gate on common property and the applicant argues carriage of the motions will be unreasonable; whether to prevent the implementation of the motions while the application is decided. Act, ss 94(2), 109, 110(3), 205, 279(1); Accommodation Module, ss 36(2)(f), 37, 40(1)(a), 43, 74, 176, 221(1).

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

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM ORDER – where the applicant seeks to challenge a motion passed at a recent extraordinary general meeting – whether the body corporate acted unreasonably in passing the motion. Act, ss 94, 279

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

TIME LIMIT – whether for good reason adjudicator should waive non-compliance with statutory time limits for making application; BUDGETS – where body corporate decided at a general meeting to adopt a sinking fund budget of $2,500 for its 2025 financial year whether the body corporate complied with its statutory obligations and failed to act reasonably in making financial management decisions; CONTRIBUTIONS – whether adjudicator is satisfied contributions levied on owners are unreasonable and that an order should be made increasing the contribution to a reasonable amount. Act, ss 94(2), 242, 276(3) and Schedule 5, Item 11; Standard Module, ss 160, 162 and 163

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

BY LAWS – whether the respondent breached the by-laws by placing pot plants and other personal items on common property, throwing food scraps into the common property garden, and by removing plants. Act, ss 184-188

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

BY-LAWS -Where a by-law requires body corporate approval for improvements to common property. IMPROVEMENT TO COMMON PROPERTY –GENERAL MEETING MOTION – power of general meeting to give retrospective authorisation for improvements to common property. RES JUDICATA– where same issue has previously been finally decided. Act, ss 94(2), 242, 276; Commercial Module, ss 134

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

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION – where the committee refused to grant approval for the applicant’s dog to reside at the scheme – whether the committee complied with the requirements of section 169B – whether keeping the animal poses an unacceptable risk to the health and safety of a neighbouring occupier – whether that risk could not reasonably be managed by conditions – whether the committee acted reasonably. Act, ss 94(2), 100(5), 169B

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

INTERIM ORDER – whether an interim order is warranted. Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (Qld), s 279

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

Appeal against order for costs - whether appellant demonstrates error on question of law- whether Appeal Panel should re-exercise discretion of Tribunal - whether partial costs should be awarded

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

BY-LAWS – whether a storage cage is permitted in a parking space pursuant to a by-law that only allows items in car spaces if stored within an approved storage cupboard. Act, ss 59(2)(a)-(b), 62(3)(a).

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

MAINTENANCE OF COMMON PROPERTY - obligation of body corporate in a Building Format Plan to maintain common property pursuant to subsection 170(1)of the Accommodation Module MAINTENANCE OF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS - Obligation of the body corporate to maintain essential supporting framework in a structurally sound condition, pursuant to subsection 170(2)(b) of the Accommodation Module, even if not part of the common property. JURISDICTION OF ADJUDICATORS –Limitation of adjudicator’s monetary jurisdiction under section 281 of the Act . Act, ss 94(2), 152, 276, 281. Accommodation Module, ss 170. Portside Noosa Waters [[2019] QBCCMCmr 623](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QBCCMCmr/2019/623.html "View Case") Australian Sunrise Citrus v Portside Noosa Waters [[2021] QCATA 44](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QCATA/2021/44.html "View Case") Seiwa Pty Ltd v The Owner’s Strata Plan 35042 [[2006] NSWSC 1157](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nsw/NSWSC/2006/1157.html "View Case"), Magog (No.15) Pty Ltd v The Moroccan [[2010] QDC 70](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QDC/2010/70.html "View Case") Morcom and Ors v Campbell-Johnson and Ors [[1955] 3 All ER 264](/cgi-bin/LawCite?cit=%5b1955%5d%203%20All%20ER%20264 "View LawCiteRecord") James & Anor v The Body Corporate for Aarons [[2003] QCA 329](/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QCA/2003/329.html "View Case")

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

UNIT TITLES – application seeking to give effect to a motion defeated at Annual General Meeting – where unsuccessful motion sought to amend rules of the units plan – merits review of the unsuccessful motion – where opposition focused on a proposed amendment to a single rule – maintenance of Class A and Class B units – whether opposition to the motion was unreasonable – whether motion, if it is to be given effect, should be given effect as put or amended – whether additional orders should be made Legislation cited: Land Titles (Unit Titles) Act 1970, ss 7, 27, 27A Legislation Act 2001, s 146 Unit Titles Act 2001, ss 10, 11, 17, 18 Unit Titles (Management) Act 2011, ss 7, 8, 9, 10, 16, 24, 73, 80, 81, 83, 88, 89, 91, 106, 107, 108, 129, Schedule 3, cls 3.16, 3.20 Subordinate legislation cited: Unit Titles (Management) Regulation 2011, s 7A, Schedule 1

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

PROPERTY DAMAGE – whether the body corporate is responsible for damage to a lot, allegedly caused by failed flashing on the roof, in a building format plan subdivision. Act, s 281; Standard Module, s 180.

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

COMMITTEE MOTION / REASONABLENESS – where the committee has refused to reimburse the applicants for works to ‘put right’ Lot 1’s exclusive use garden area after damage from plumbing repairs carried out by the body corporate – where the body corporate has charged the applicants for replacement of the part of the irrigation system servicing Lot 1’s exclusive use garden area – whether the body corporate has acted unreasonably. Act, ss 20, 94, 100, 152, 227, 239, 170; Accommodation Module, s 170

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

BY-LAWS – whether the respondent has breached and continues to breach the applicable noise by-law; whether the noise by-law is valid. Act, ss 94, 100(1) & (5), 168, 169, 180(1) & (7), 182-186; Accommodation Module, s 57

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

• The Owners – Strata Plan No 83678 owners corp
• Michael Khatib lot owner

The appeal by the owners corporation against the Tribunal's decision to make a by-law permitting the installation of an awning on common property was dismissed, with the Tribunal having found the owners corporation unreasonably refused to make the common property rights by-law.