Brikmore Pty Ltd v. Poinciana Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd

In the Supreme Court of Queensland, Brikmore Pty Ltd sought a declaration that it had a management contract with the respondents, who are co-operative housing societies. The dispute centred on whether the management contracts executed in May and October 2006 were valid or void due to the absence of prior approval from the Registrar under the Financial Intermediaries Act 1996. The respondents argued that the contracts were void and that no binding contract existed, while the applicant maintained that a contract had been formed through the parties' conduct.

The central legal issue was whether the management contracts executed in May 2006 were valid despite the Registrar's approval being given one day later than required by law. The court had to determine if the Act required the Registrar's approval to be given before the contract was made, or if approval given shortly after could still render the contract valid. Additionally, the court needed to assess if the subsequent conduct of the parties, including the execution of amended contracts in October 2006, demonstrated an intention to terminate or replace the earlier agreements.

The court found that the parties had indeed entered into a contract by their conduct in July 2006, adhering to the terms of the May agreements. The judge concluded that the October contracts were not intended to replace the existing contracts but were seen as amendments. The fact that the October contracts were not submitted for approval supported this view. Therefore, the management contracts made in July 2006 remained in effect. The court declared that the applicant had a management contract with each of the respondents, on the terms set out in the document dated 23 May 2006. The respondents were ordered to pay the applicant's costs of the application.