Alexander Nicholson, David Swire and Ronald Brooks v M & T Entriken Pty Ltd trading as M & T Entriken Property Trust

In the case of Alexander Nicholson, David Swire, and Ronald Brooks v M & T Entriken Pty Ltd trading as M & T Entriken Property Trust, the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) addressed the dispute concerning the market rent review for the homeowners at the Palm Beach Holiday Park. The homeowners challenged the proposed increase in site rent by the park owner, arguing it was not fair and equitable. The tribunal was tasked with determining the appropriate site rent based on expert valuations and considering factors such as the decommissioning of the park's bowling green and the disparity in bargaining power between the parties.

The primary legal issues were the interpretation of the term 'previous site rental period' in the context of the market rent review, and the application of capitalisation rates in determining a fair and equitable site rent. The tribunal also had to consider the inequality of bargaining power between the homeowners and the park owner, and whether the proposed increase in site rent was justified. The court had to weigh the expert valuation evidence provided by both parties and decide on the appropriate site rent that reflected the market conditions as at the date of the proposed increase.

In its decision, the tribunal found that the term 'previous site rental period' should be interpreted as the period immediately preceding the proposed increase in site rent. The tribunal preferred the evidence of Mr. Rutledge, who assessed the fair market site rent at $145 per site per week. However, the tribunal adjusted this amount to $147 per site per week to account for the increased expenses incurred by the park owner. The tribunal concluded that the proposed increase to $160 per site per week was not fair and equitable, given the decommissioning of the bowling green and the disparity in bargaining power. Consequently, the tribunal ordered the site rent increase to be reduced to $147 per site per week and mandated the park owner to refund any overpayments made by the homeowners since the increase was implemented.

The final orders were that the site rent increase effective from 4 October 2012 would be reduced from $160 per site per week to $147 per site per week, and the park owner was required to refund to the applicants any overpayment of the site rent since when the increased site rent had been paid.