O'Brien v SEQ Properties Pty Ltd - [2014] QCAT 270

CITATION:

O’Brien v SEQ Properties Pty Ltd [2014] QCAT 270

PARTIES:	Lorna O’Brien (Applicant)
v
SEQ Properties Pty Ltd (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

OCL005-13

MATTER TYPE:

Other civil dispute matters

HEARING DATE:

16 April 2014

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Hughes

DELIVERED ON:

1 May 2014

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1. SEQ Properties Pty Ltd repositions the home on site 185 so that it does not encroach outside its boundaries by 1 September 2014; and

2. In default, SEQ Properties Pty Ltd pays to Lorna O’Brien the sum of $27,874.00 to reposition the home on site 185 so that it does not encroach outside those boundaries.

CATCHWORDS:

MANUFACTURED HOMES – where site agreement dispute – whether breach of duty by park owner to precisely identify site – where park owner aware of boundaries - where failure by park owner to accurately identify site boundaries in site agreement – where home owner relies upon information provided by park owner - where information not sufficient for home owner to position home within site – where manufactured home encroaches on road reserve park – whether order to reposition home is appropriate

Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Act 2003 (Qld), ss 4, 14A, 17, 19, 25, 25B, 35, 58, 87, 89, 91 and 140

Castlemaine Tooheys Ltd v Carlton & United Breweries Ltd (1987) 10 NSWLR 468

Clarke v Cascade Pools (Qld) Pty Ltd [2010] QCAT 323
Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of NSW (1982) 149 CLR 337
Groves v Winbourne [1898] 2 QB 402
Liverpool City Council v Irwin & Anor [1976] 2 All ER 39
Miller v Hancock [1893] 2 QB 177

Sovar v Henry Lane Pty Ltd (1967) 116 CLR 397

Spargo v Katz [2010] QCATA 9

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

APPLICANT: Lorna O’Brien appeared in person

RESPONDENT: SEQ Properties Pty Ltd represented by Angus Booker, Chief Executive Officer

REASONS FOR DECISION
What is this Application about?

Lorna O’Brien wants SEQ Properties Pty Ltd to reposition her manufactured home within its site boundaries at an estimated cost of $27,874.00.[1]
[1]Quote LB of Queensland Complexing Pty Ltd dated 26 November 2013.
Lorna O’Brien’s home encroaches up to 1.6 metres onto a Department of Transport and Main Roads road reserve.[2] SEQ is the park owner from whom she rents her site.
[2]Identification Survey Map dated 6 September 2011.

What is the Tribunal’s jurisdiction?

The Tribunal may make any order it considers appropriate to resolve a site agreement dispute.[3]
[3]Manufactured Homes (Residential Parks) Act 2003 (Qld) s 140.
Ms O’Brien and SEQ entered into a site agreement for Site 185 commencing 19 October 2007.[4] The application requires a determination of whether SEQ is in breach of the site agreement or the Act[5] as a result of the position of Ms O’Brien’s home. This requires a determination of the parties’ rights and obligations under that agreement or the Act.[6]
[4]Site Agreement between SEQ Properties Pty Ltd as Park Owner and Lorna O’Brien as
Home Owner commencing 19 October 2007.

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading O'Brien v SEQ Properties Pty Ltd

Details

AGLC: O'Brien v SEQ Properties Pty Ltd [2014] QCAT 270
Case: [2014] QCAT 270
Decision Date: 1 May 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of O'Brien v SEQ Properties Pty Ltd involved Lorna O'Brien, the plaintiff, and SEQ Properties Pty Ltd, the defendant. The dispute centred around a manufactured home that O'Brien had placed on a site owned by SEQ Properties. The crux of the matter was whether SEQ Properties had breached its duty to accurately identify the site boundaries in the site agreement. O'Brien relied on the information provided by SEQ Properties to position her home, but the information was insufficient, leading to the home encroaching onto a road reserve.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether SEQ Properties had failed in its duty to precisely identify the site boundaries in the site agreement, and if so, whether this constituted a breach of contract. Additionally, the court had to determine whether it was appropriate to order the repositioning of the home, given the circumstances of the case.

The court found that SEQ Properties had indeed breached its duty by not accurately identifying the site boundaries in the site agreement. This was a crucial factor, as O'Brien had reasonably relied on the information provided by SEQ Properties to position her home. The court held that the information given was not sufficient for O'Brien to accurately place her home within the site. Consequently, the court ordered SEQ Properties to reposition the home so that it no longer encroached on the road reserve. If SEQ Properties failed to comply with this order by 1 September 2014, it would be required to pay O'Brien $27,874.00 to facilitate the repositioning of the home.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. SEQ Properties Pty Ltd repositions the home on site 185 so that it does not encroach outside its boundaries by 1 September 2014; and

2. In default, SEQ Properties Pty Ltd pays to Lorna O’Brien the sum of $27,874.00 to reposition the home on site 185 so that it does not encroach outside those boundaries.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.