- MHL represented a Body Corporate client which obtained the desired result at a Conciliation in the Commissioner’s Office, which was for the removal of a fence from common property.
- MHL was successful in obtaining interim orders preventing the implementation of a motion to be considered at an upcoming extraordinary general meeting where the implementation of the relevant motion would have been detrimental to MHL’s client.
- MHL successfully defended a Body Corporate client against an owner’s application for orders that a motion which was carried at the AGM was invalid and should have been ruled out of order. In this case, the relevant motion related to the engagement of the Body Corporate Manager.
- MHL successfully defended a Body Corporate against an owner’s application. The adjudicator agreed with the Body Corporate’s position that customers of the adjacent marina have no rights to use the common property recreational facilities, even if the owner of the marina is also a lot owner in the scheme.
- MHL successfully represented a Body Corporate client in obtaining orders that:
– a motion for an extension of the caretaking agreement considered at the AGM was invalid due to an administrative error not requiring the motion to be considered by secret ballot; and
– a further motion proposing to extend the caretaking agreement can be considered in the same financial year, as a result of the previous motion being declared invalid.
- MHL successfully defended a Body Corporate client in QCATA against an appeal filed by an owner appealing an order of an adjudicator. As a result of the appeal being dismissed, the Body Corporate can now register a new Community Management Statement to incorporate the exclusive use car parking and storage allocations which were removed without the required approval by a previous Community Management Statement registered in 2004
- MHL successfully defended a Body Corporate client against an application for final orders made by a lot owner to prevent the implementation of EGM resolutions approving the settlement of long running litigation and raising the settlement funds by a special levy. The application was dismissed on the basis that it was misconceived and without substance. The applicant was ordered to pay $2,000 to the Body Corporate in partial compensation for its costs in defending the application.
- MHL successfully defended a Body Corporate client against an application made by a lot owner seeking final orders regarding the enforcement of the parking by-laws against a specified occupier and the proposed marking of specified parking bays as visitor car parking.
MHL represents numerous Bodies Corporate every year when management rights are transferred. Recently we acted in a transaction involving 5 Bodies Corporate and another with 4 Bodies Corporate.
We assisted a Body Corporate with negotiations in respect of a building consultant’s contract and also in respect of a contract with the contractor for a major building project.
Vale Jeremy Brown
In August our greatly esteemed friend and colleague, Jeremy Brown, passed away.
It is profoundly sad to lose such a fine young man and talented lawyer. Jeremy was greatly loved by everyone at Mathews Hunt Legal and by his many clients. He will always be remembered for the high quality of his work and his dedication to our clients, but most importantly, for his gentle laid-back style, his great love of nature and his wonderful sense of humour.