The Proprietors - Rosebank GTP 3033 v Locke

The appeal in The Proprietors - Rosebank GTP 3033 v Locke involved a dispute between the appellant, a residential body corporate governed by the Building Units and Group Titles Act 1980 (Qld), and the respondent, a third-party body corporate. The dispute centred around the appellant's attempt to pass a by-law permitting the expenditure of body corporate funds on primary thoroughfare assets adjacent to the body corporate’s common property. The appellant subsequently passed a motion approving expenditure from its sinking funds on an upgrade of land located on the primary thoroughfare. A Tribunal under the Act determined the by-law and motion to be invalid, leading to the appellant's appeal. The legal issues before the court were whether the by-law making power under section 30(2) of the Act could authorise a by-law inconsistent with the Act and whether the by-law and motion were valid.

The court's reasoning focused on the interpretation of the Act and the applicability of by-laws to property not part of the common property. The Tribunal had found that the by-law and motion were invalid as they did not have statutory power to authorise the expenditure on property not part of the residential body corporate. The court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that the Act limits expenditure on improvements to areas of common property. The court found that the appellant did not have the power under the Act to authorise improvements to property not part of the residential body corporate, thus rendering the by-law and motion invalid.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, affirming the Tribunal's decision. The court held that the appellant could not expend sinking funds on improvements to property that was not part of the common property, as the by-law did not provide a valid authorisation for such expenditure. The court's decision reinforced the limitations on the by-law making power and the necessity for any expenditure to align with the statutory provisions of the Act.