Robley v Body Corporate for the Dalgety (Apartments)

[2013] QCAT 584

CITATION: Robley v Body Corporate for The Dalgety (Apartments) [2013] QCAT 584

PARTIES:	Stephen Mark Robley and Barbara Joan Robley (Applicants)
v
Body Corporate for The Dalgety (Apartments) CTS 41448 (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER: OCL070-13

MATTER TYPE: Other civil disputes matters

HEARING DATE: On the papers

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: James White, Member

DELIVERED ON: 15 November 2013

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.    That the contribution schedule lot entitlements for The Dalgety Apartments CTS 41448 be adjusted such that the entitlements be as set out in the attached table.

2.    There are no orders as to costs.

CATCHWORDS:

Body Corporate and Community Management - adjustment of Contribution Schedule Lot Entitlements

Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 ss 48(6), 49(4)

Fisher & Ors v Body Corporate for Centrepoint Community Title Scheme 7779 [2004] QCA 214 Mango Property Pty Ltd v Body Corporate for West End Entral Commercial CTS 33391 [2011] QCAT 156

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION:

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal 2009 (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction

1. The Dalgety Apartments CTS 41448 consists of 223 lots (6 commercial lots and 117 residential lots) together with car parking areas. It is a 21 level building situated at 84 – 106 Denham Street, Townsville.

2. On 2 October 2013 Mr & Mrs Robley lodged an application for the adjustment of the contribution schedule lot entitlement (CSLE) of the 223 lots in the scheme. The application is brought under the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (BCCMA).

3. The Respondent Body Corporate with the consent of the Applicants obtained a Valuation Report dated 30 September 2013 from Opteon (North Qld) Pty Ltd (Opteon) prepared by AD Dickinson, to determine whether their should be a revision of the Lot Entitlement in accordance with the BCCMA. The valuation date was 21 May 2013 (Opteon Report).

Legislation

1. The governing principle under the BCCMA is set out in ss 48 and 49 that ‘respective lot entitlements should be equal, except to the extent to which it is just and equitable in the circumstances for them not to be equal’.[1]

   [1]BCCMA s 48(6).

2. In determining what would be just and equitable circumstances to a change to the lot entitlements the Tribunal takes into account:

   (a)how the community titles scheme is structured; and

   (b)the nature, features and characteristics of the lots included in the scheme.[2]

   [2]Ibid s 49(4).

3. The starting point is that the entitlements should be equal; a departure from the principle is allowable where it is just or fair to recognise inequality; and the allocation of lot entitlements is to be made on the basis of the impact that individual apartments make upon the cost of operating a community titles scheme; only to the extent that they affect the cost of operating the community titles scheme.[3]

   [3]Fisher & Ors v Body Corporate for Centrepoint Community Title Scheme 7779 [2004] QCA 214; Mango Property Pty Ltd v Body Corporate for West End Entral Commercial CTS 33391 [2011] QCAT 156.

Consideration

1. Both the Applicants and the Respondent Body Corporate agree with the Opteon Report

2. All that remains is whether this Tribunal applying the BCCMA also agrees with the Opteon Report.

3. The Tribunal has considered the Opteon Report and the submissions filed by the parties. It takes the view that it is just and equitable to order that the contribution lot entitlements for the scheme be adjusted to reflect the lot entitlements proposed by the Opteon Report. In making this decision the Tribunal takes into account how the community titles scheme is structured, the nature, features and characteristics of the building and the purpose for which the lots are and have been used. All of these matters were properly addressed in the Opteon Report together with the valuation assessment.

4. The proposed changes to the lot entitlements are set out in the following table, which will be annexed to the formal order.

Lot Number	Entitlement	Lot Number	Entitlement
101	134	604	265
102	156	605	290
103	164	606	290
104	133	607	315
105	173	701	330
106	97.5	702	365
201	315	703	270
202	245	704	270
203	245	705	295
204	285	706	295
301	325	707	325
302	250	801	340
303	250	802	375
304	290	803	275
401	285	804	345
402	335	805	465
403	255	806	350
404	255	901	360
405	280	902	390
406	280	903	285
407	295	904	360
501	295	905	480
502	345	906	365
503	260	1001	370
504	260	1002	340
505	285	1003	295
506	285	1004	370
507	305	1005	490
601	305	1006	375
602	370	1101	380
603	265	1102	410
1103	305	1604	430
1104	380	1605	435
1105	500	1605	550
1106	385	1701	440
1201	390	1702	470
1202	420	1703	365
1203	315	1704	440
1204	390	1705	560
1205	510	1706	445
1206	395	1801	450
1301	400	1802	480
1302	430	1803	375
1303	325	1804	450
1304	400	1805	570
1305	520	1806	455
1306	405	1901	475
1401	410	1902	505
1402	440	1903	385
1403	335	1904	475
1404	410	1905	580
1405	530	1906	480
1406	415	2001	670
1501	420	2002	880
1502	450	2003	885
1503	345	2004	720
1504	420	2101	680
1505	540	2102	890
1506	425	2103	895
1601	430	2104	730
1602	460	2201	1400
1603	355	TOTAL	49,172.5