1. |
A lot owner wanted to join two decks together. |
2. |
Those works required the approval of the body corporate at general meeting by a resolution without dissent (meaning that a single vote against the motion would defeat it). |
3. |
Votes were cast against the motion so it was not approved. |
4. |
The lot owner made an application to the Commissioner’s Office have the body corporate’s dissent set aside on the basis it was an unreasonable decision. That application was successful – and the order can be read here. |
5. |
The dissenting owners appealed that decision to the QCAT. The dissenting owners were successful and that judgement can be found here. |
6. |
The lot owner then appealed the QCAT decision and the Qld Court of Appeal pronounced judgement last Friday. |
1. |
The lot owner argued that the QCAT appeal tribunal (QCATA) was wrong to disturb the approach of the adjudicator – that is, that the adjudicator was correct in concluding that the question of reasonableness is an objective question requiring a consideration of all relevant circumstances; and |
2. |
The dissenting owners contended that the decision of QCATA was correct and that the various elements described by QCATA in paragraphs 84 to 85 of its decision should remain in force. |
1. |
an objective test (i.e. what an ordinary person would consider reasonable); and |
2. |
one which requires a consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances. |
1. |
For a decision of a body corporate to be reasonable, all circumstances
surrounding a decision must be considered. That means both sides of any
argument should be reviewed and issues that a body corporate has with
any proposal should be ventilated with the proposer. So that would never mean a cursory look at the material and a decision based on what might be the immediate vibe. After all – how can it be said that all of the circumstances were considered if the body corporate had questions but didn’t ask them? |
2. |
Those matters must then be considered objectively – that is, not through the rose-coloured glasses of a naïve or self interested body corporate. In our day to day personal dealings we can all be as unreasonable as we like. Bodies corporate simply cannot. |
3. |
For us, it follows that if a body corporate is going to reject a proposal it must set out why that decision was taken. A body corporate must be able to explain its position rather than simply say ‘no’. |