The Esplanade Apartments [2001] QBCCMCmr 60 (8 February 2001)

RA MeekREFERENCE: 0076-2001

ORDER OF AN ADJUDICATOR

MADE UNDER PART 10 OF CHAPTER 6

BODY CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACT 1997

Number of Scheme:	6852
Name of Scheme:	The Esplanade Apartments
Address of Scheme:	146 to 156 The Esplanade BURLEIGH HEADS QLD 4220

TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to an application made under the abovementioned Act by the committee of the Body Corporate for The Esplanade Apartments


RA MeekI hereby order that the application on behalf of the committee of The Esplanade Apartments for an order of an adjudicator authorising the committee to spend funds above the relevant limit for committee spending for this scheme is dismissed.

STATEMENT OF ADJUDICATOR’S REASONS FOR DECISION - REF 0076-2001

“The Esplanade Apartments” CTS 6852

The applicant, the committee for The Esplanade Apartments, has sought an order of an adjudicator under the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (the Act) that the committee of the body corporate be authorised to spend in excess of its relevant limit for committee spending, on the basis that the spending is required to meet an emergency. Specifically, the order is sought to authorise the committee to spend funds up to a maximum of $55000.00 on the rectification of the podium slab which has suffered significant cracking.

Section 103(1) of the Body Corporate and Community Management (Standard Module) (the module) provides in part as follows -

The committee may only carry out a proposal involving spending above the relevant limit for committee spending for the scheme if ... an adjudicator is satisfied that the spending is required to meet an emergency and authorises it under an order made under the dispute resolution provisions.

The module defines the “relevant limit for committee spending” as an amount worked out by multiplying the number of lots included in the scheme by $100. Given that there are 51 lots in this scheme, then the relevant limit for committee spending is $5,100. The applicant seeks authorisation to expend up to a maximum of $55,000.

In the application, the applicant states that the expenditure is required to effect rectification of the podium slab which has suffered significant cracking. I doubt that this matter falls into the category of emergency. It is more suggestive of a lack of routine or ongoing maintenance over a period of time, of which the committee / body corporate should have been aware of, and made provision for.

In the circumstances, it is questionable in my view whether the spending sought to be authorised is required to meet an emergency, in accordance with section 103(1)(c) of the module. In any event this question is academic, as section 103(3) provides that –

This section has effect subject to the requirements under this division for spending that is above the relevant limit for major spending.

The relevant limit for major spending is defined as the amount determined by multiplying the number of lots by $200. For this scheme, the limit is $10,200. The amount sought to be authorised is in excess of five times this limit. Consequently, I have no power to make the order as sought. This application is dismissed. refused n