Natchez [2000] QBCCMCmr 242 (29 May 2000)

RA MeekREFERENCE: 0243-2000

INTERIM ORDER OF AN ADJUDICATOR

MADE UNDER PART 10 OF CHAPTER 6

BODY CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACT 1997

Number of Scheme:	21238
Name of Scheme:	Natchez
Address of Scheme:	87 Springwood Road SPRINGWOOD QLD 4127

TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to an application made under the abovementioned Act by the body corporate for Natchez

RA MeekI hereby order that the application by the Body Corporate for Natchez for an interim order terminating the services of Logan Body Corporate Management, is dismissed.

n

STATEMENT OF ADJUDICATOR’S REASONS FOR DECISION - REF 0243-2000

“Natchez” CMS 21238

The applicant, the Body Corporate for Natchez, has sought the following order of an adjudicator under the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (the Act), quote -

Termination of Logan Body Corporate Management.

The Applicant has also sought the following interim order of an adjudicator, quote -

We regard this matter as urgent as the manager has stated he will draw funds from body corporate accounts. So we would give this your urgent attention.

Section 225(1) provides that an adjudicator may make an interim order if satisfied, on reasonable grounds, that an interim order is necessary because of the nature or urgency of the circumstances to which the application relates. An adjudicator’s order may contain ancillary or consequential provisions the adjudicator considers necessary or appropriate (section 230(1)).

In the supporting grounds, the applicant states that –

At a meeting of the committee of Natchez held 3.4.2000 it was voted, the body corporate services provided by Logan Body Corporate Service be terminated. This service is month to month and it was agreed by written directive Mr Golden have all records and funds ready for collection by 3 May 2000. On Thursday 27.4.2000 Mr Golden informed the chairperson and a committee member he did not intend to abide by this decision and stated he intended to remain in his position until 31.8.2000 at a minimum rate of $650 per month or an alternative offer being made to him, stating he had been unfairly dismissed. This is not the terms of agreement and we would like the appropriate measures taken, so as the new body corporate service can begin its contract.

A copy of the committee meeting minutes at which the body corporate purported to terminate the services of Logan Body Corporate Service was attached as part of the application.

The respondent, Logan Body Corporate Service (LBCS) has made a submission in response to the application. That submission states in part –

The dispute resolution provisions contained in the ... body corporate management agreement between Natchez and (LBCS) have been completely disregarded.

The order sought does not make sense. ...

As required by the BCCM Act – and the previous BUGTA – a body corporate manager must be appointed by a general meeting not a committee meeting.

The issues involved in this application are relatively simple to determine, and though the application requests that an interim order be made, this order will in fact be final in my determination of this application.



Section 58 of the standard module provides as follows –

ú
Amendment or revocation of resolution of general meeting
58. If a resolution without dissent, special resolution or ordinary
resolution is required for a particular purpose, a resolution passed for the
purpose may only be amended or revoked by a resolution of the required
type.

The engagement of a person as a body corporate manager may only be made by ordinary resolution of the body corporate in general meeting (see section 87(1)). Consequently, under section 58, a revocation or termination of the engagement can only be done by ordinary resolution of the body corporate in general meeting. For this reason, the actions of the committee at the meeting held on 3 April 2000 are invalid and of no effect.

The action the committee might have resolved to undertake was to call an EGM at which the body corporate in general meeting might consider the issue, and further, to resolve to include a motion on the agenda of that meeting that the services of LBCS be terminated. Further, the basis of such termination would need to comply with one of the circumstances set out in section 86 headed “Termination”.

In the circumstances, it is not intended to invite further submissions regarding this matter, or to make a further order, since this decision, though an interim one as sought by the applicant, is final in its determination of this matter. If the applicant considers that an appeal of this decision is warranted, then it should appeal the interim order.