Quartermaine Park [2002] QBCCMCmr 651 (28 October 2002)

RA MeekREFERENCE: 0468-2002

INTERIM ORDER OF AN ADJUDICATOR

MADE UNDER PART 10 OF CHAPTER 6

BODY CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACT 1997

Number of Scheme:	21690
Name of Scheme:	Quartermaine Park
Address of Scheme:	170 - 177 Latimers Crossing Road ADVANCETOWN QLD 4211

TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to an application made under the abovementioned Act by

Veronica Sive, the co-owner of lot 3



RA MeekI hereby order that the application by Veronica Sive, the co-owner of lot 3, for an interim order that I invalidate a committee meeting as the applicant was not advised in writing of the meeting or items on agenda including voting for body corporate secretary, is dismissed.

n

STATEMENT OF ADJUDICATOR’S REASONS FOR DECISION - REF 0468-2002

“Quartermaine Park” CMS 21690

The applicant, Veronica Sive, the co-owner of lot 3, has sought the following order of an adjudicator under the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (the Act), quote –

1. Dissolve last body corporate meeting;

2. Seek to elect secretary and correct body corporate management methods;

3. Seek to have mediator to assist in resolving issues and management protocols of body corporate;

4. Mediator to resolve ongoing financial and general body corporate management issues between 4 lots (owners).

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

Invalidate committee meeting as we were not advised in writing of meeting or items on agenda including voting for body corporate secretary.

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 relevantly that –

The final problem occurred when the Olsen and Ford owners, simply called a meeting without informing all parties in writing, no agenda, no notification, and at 11.00 am on Friday July 2002. Without a proper election Reg Ford became the body corporate secretary.

Jorge Scanzi attended the meeting by default. He was verbally advised a meeting was to take place by Shaun Kenaan of Energex ... to discuss the power line issue and therefore was in attendance. This meeting became the annual body corporate meeting.

I would like that meeting invalidated and mediation sought with the Olson and Ford owners as they are operating without fair and equal involvement of all property owners. ...

The interim order sought is that I invalidate a committee meeting. No copy of the committee minutes in question were provided as part of the application. I am confused by reference to a committee meeting in the requested interim order, and to a body corporate meeting in the requested final order. Are these meetings one and the same, or are different meetings being referred to.

As part of my investigation of this dispute which I am required to undertake, I sought a copy of relevant minutes.

A person by the name of Mr Ford, who the applicant alleges is the body corporate secretary, was contacted regarding a copy of the minutes. He apparently had attended this office previous to this request, and spoke to a member of the information service “showing him the minutes along with other documents”. The officer did not take a copy of those minutes from Mr Ford, and presumably was unaware that the minutes were required as part of an application. Though Mr Ford was unhappy at being again requested for a copy of the minutes, he indicated that he would “write it out again” and send it by mail. To date, a copy of the minutes have not been received from Mr Ford.

On 1 October, this office was advised by the applicant that she had not received any minutes and therefore was not aware of any minutes to the meeting under discussion.

On 8 October, this office wrote to the applicant in the following terms, quote -

Your application seeks, in part, to invalidate this meeting. An adjudicator cannot appropriately consider the validity of a meeting without a notice or minutes of that meeting, and with scant details regarding the circumstances leading up to the meeting and what occurred at the meeting. We have received no submission from the other owners in this scheme, which may otherwise shed light on the situation.

As you may be aware, our Office originally attempted to obtain a copy of the relevant minutes directly from Mr Ford. In our communications, it seemed apparent that Mr Ford did have minutes for the meeting, however we had difficulty in obtaining a copy from him. Consequently, as the obligation of providing information relevant to the application rests with the applicant, we referred our request for the minutes to you.

If Mr Ford has not compiled minutes of the meeting, you are asked to provide a clear, detailed statement of your recollections of what occurred at the meeting. Furthermore, you should outline the relevant circumstances leading up to the meeting, for example at what time and by what means were you advised of the meeting. Such a statement cannot carry the same weight as formal minutes, however it may enable the Adjudicator to progress that matter. ...

To date, the applicant has not responded to the requirements of this letter. I am satisfied that it is within the applicant’s ability to so respond for the reason that the co-owner of her lot did attend the meeting. Given this, then the applicant should have obtained from her co-owner a detailed statement of both the circumstances leading up to the meeting being held, and further what business was transacted at the meeting, as per his recollections. As the party making the application, the applicant is required to provide evidence of the matters alleged.

I am unable to consider the merits of an application to invalidate a meeting, without sufficient details concerning that meeting. Further I consider it unreasonable that I be expected that I do so. For this reason, I now intend to dismiss this application for an interim order.

Following the interim order, I intend to have administrative officers again write to the applicant, and also to Mr Ford, requesting in the case of the applicant, a statement of her co-owner who attended the meeting, providing details of the meeting, and in the case of Mr Ford, a copy of the minutes, which he, if he was elected secretary as the applicant alleges, should have prepared following the meeting.

The final order to this application will depend on the outcome of these several requests. Should I receive no reply, or no satisfactory reply from the applicant, I intend to dismiss the application without further investigation. Should I receive a satisfactory reply from the applicant, but not the body corporate, the I will rely on the information provided by the applicant in the absence of any evidence to the contrary. This may result in invalidation of the meeting as sought in the application. If a receive satisfactory responses from both parties, I will further investigate this dispute from that point.

In addition, I intend to seek submissions from all other owners in relation the application.