Body Corporate for Oceana on Broadbeach CTS 24163 v 21 Broadbeach Blvd Pty Ltd (No 2) [2025] QSC 73

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Body Corporate for Oceana on Broadbeach CTS 24163 v 21 Broadbeach Blvd Pty Ltd (No 2) [2025] QSC 73 PARTIES: BODY CORPORATE FOR OCEANA ON BROADBEACH CTS 24163 (Plaintiff) v 21 BROADBEACH BLVD PTY LTD (First Defendant) And GLENQ PTY LTD (Second Defendant) FILE NO/S: BS 954 of 2025 DIVISION: Trial Division PROCEEDING: Application DELIVERED ON: 9 April 2025 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: On the papers JUDGE: Bowskill CJ ORDERS: Orders made as per the attachment to these reasons. CATCHWORDS: COUNSEL: L M Campbell for the defendants (applicants) G P Handran KC and B W Wacker for the plaintiff (respondent) SOLICITORS: Mills Oakley for the defendants (applicants) Frigo James Legal Pty Ltd for the plaintiff (respondent) [1] For the reasons given in the judgment delivered on 7 April 2025 ([2025] QSC 68), I ordered that the proceedings be stayed until a date to be fixed after hearing further submissions from the parties, to enable a further meeting of the body corporate to be called and held, at which a motion to authorise the commencement of this proceeding could be considered. It was necessary to give the parties the opportunity to be heard about the duration of the stay, noting that s 81 of the Regulation requires 21 days’ notice to be given of such a meeting. At the time of delivering judgment, counsel for the defendants indicated that it may also be desirable to include in any orders made an order for the filing of a defence, and counsel for the plaintiff agreed. [2] The parties have been unable to agree on the terms of the order giving effect to the Court’s decision. The defendants propose an order that the proceeding is stayed for a specific time period – 40 days – and a direction that the defendants file and serve a -- 1 of 3 -- 2 defence within 47 days (noting that, where a conditional notice of intention to defend has been filed, and an application to strike out the proceeding dismissed, the defence must be filed within seven days (see UCPR 144(6)). [3] The plaintiff proposes an order, in effect, that the proceeding be stayed until it is demonstrated, by an affidavit exhibiting a copy of the minutes, to be authorised by special resolution passed by the body corporate. Once that has been demonstrated, the defendants are to have seven days to file a defence. [4] There is also a minor variation suggested by the plaintiff to order 2 made by me on 7 April, at the time of delivering judgment – to remove the word “otherwise” in the order that “the defendant’s application … is otherwise dismissed”. That is put on the basis that the defendants’ application was wholly unsuccessful. I decline to vary order 2 as made. The defendants’ application to strike out was unsuccessful – but not on the basis of no relief being granted at all. [5] I will make orders today generally in the terms proposed by the plaintiff, as this form of orders provides a clear mechanism by which the court, and the defendants, are informed when the meeting has been held and the special resolution has been passed. The orders made are set out in the annexure to these reasons. [6] For completeness, I note that after hearing from the parties in relation to costs, I ordered that each party bear their own costs of the application. I did not consider there was a basis to order the plaintiff to pay the defendants’ costs in all the circumstances of the case and was not persuaded there was any reason to reserve the question of costs until another time. -- 2 of 3 -- 3 SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND REGISTRY: Brisbane NUMBER: BS954/25 Plaintiff: BODY CORPORATE FOR OCEANA ON BROADBEACH CTS 24163 AND First Defendant: 21 BROADBEACH BLVD PTY LTD AND Second Defendant: GLENQ PTY LTD ORDER Before: Chief Justice Bowskill Date: 9 April 2025 Initiating document: Application filed 26 March 2025 [CFI 3] THE ORDER OF THE COURT IS THAT: 1. The proceeding is stayed until the plaintiff is authorised by special resolution to bring this proceeding against the defendants. 2. An affidavit of the solicitor for the plaintiff exhibiting the minutes of the meeting at which any such special resolution was passed by the plaintiff is sufficient evidence of the matters it contains. 3. The defendants’ application filed 26 March 2025 [CFI 3] is otherwise dismissed. 4. Each party bear their own costs of the application. THE COURT DIRECTS THAT: 5. The plaintiff file and serve an affidavit demonstrating compliance with Order 1. 6. Upon the plaintiff complying with order 5, the stay be lifted. 7. The defendants file and serve any defence on or before the date which is 7 days after service of the affidavit in accordance with order 5. Signed: -- 3 of 3 --