SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND"

Transcription

1 SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: LQ Management Pty Ltd & Ors v Laguna Quays Resort Principal Body Corporate & Anor [2014] QCA 122 LQ MANAGEMENT PTY LTD ACN (first appellant) LAGUNA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN (second appellant) TURTLE POINT HOTEL AND SPA PTY LTD ACN (third appellant) LAGUNA WHITSUNDAYS AIRPORT PTY LTD ACN (fourth appellant) KUNAPIPI PASTORAL PTY LTD ACN (fifth appellant) ASD LAGUNA INVESTMENTS PTY LTD ACN (sixth appellant) TURTLE POINT HOTEL PTY LTD ACN (seventh appellant) QUEENS HILL PTY LTD ACN (eighth appellant) PANDANUS PTY LTD ACN (ninth appellant) MARINA PTY LTD ACN (tenth appellant) VILLAGE PTY LTD ACN (eleventh appellant) TURTLE POINT GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB PTY LTD ACN (twelfth appellant) v

2 2 LAGUNA QUAYS RESORT PRINCIPAL BODY CORPORATE ABN (first respondent) LAGUNA QUAYS RESORT PRIMARY THOROUGHFARE BODY CORPORATE ABN (second respondent) FILE NO/S: Appeal No of 2013 SC No 2187 of 2012 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal General Civil Appeal DELIVERED ON: 27 May 2014 DELIVERED AT: Supreme Court at Brisbane Brisbane HEARING DATE: 20 May 2014 JUDGES: ORDERS: CATCHWORDS: Muir JA and Atkinson and Dalton JJ Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made 1. The appeal be allowed. 2. The order made on 7 November 2013 be set aside. 3. The first and second respondents pay the appellants costs of and incidental to the application for the determination of separate questions including the costs of the hearing in that regard and the costs of the appeal. APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL APPEAL GENERAL PRINCIPLES RIGHT OF APPEAL WHEN APPEAL LIES ERROR OF LAW WHAT IS GENERALLY where the first respondent is the principal body corporate incorporated by registration of an initial plan of subdivision for a resort where the second respondent is the primary thoroughfare body corporate incorporated by registration of a plan of subdivision where the first appellant is the manager of the commercial aspects of the resort where in trial division proceedings it was ordered by consent that questions regarding voting entitlements within the primary thoroughfare body corporate be the subject of prior determination whether subsequent stages of the development came about through amendments to the initial scheme or through the approval of subsequent stages whether the primary judge erred in finding that subsequent stages of the development came about through amendments to the initial scheme whether the

3 3 COUNSEL: SOLICITORS: primary judge erred in finding that changes in voting entitlements could take place without registration of the plans Integrated Resort Development Act 1987 (Qld), s 7, s 9, s 13, s 26, s 108, s 134, s 137 Laguna Quays Resort Principal Body Corporate v Laguna Quays Resort Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate & Ors [2013] QSC 303, considered M T De Waard for the appellants D E F Chesterman for the first respondent D F W Tucker for the second respondent McKays Solicitors for the appellants Nicholsons Solicitors for the first respondent Tucker & Cowen Solicitors for the second respondent [1] MUIR JA: Introduction The first respondent is the principal body corporate incorporated by registration of the first initial plan of subdivision in respect of the Laguna Quays Resort Scheme of Integrated Resort Development Stage 1 (the initial scheme) approved by Order in Council made on 1 May 1992 pursuant to the Integrated Resort Development Act 1987 (Qld) (the Act). The second respondent is the primary thoroughfare body corporate, also incorporated by registration of such plan of subdivision. [2] The first appellant is the manager of the commercial aspects of the resort. The other appellants are registered owners of or have interests in lots in the development. On 14 June 2013, in proceedings in the trial division of this Court, it was ordered by consent that the following questions be the subject of prior determination: 1 1. What is the total number of voting entitlements within the Laguna Quays Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate? 2. Who are the holders of the voting entitlements within the Laguna Quays Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate? 3. In what proportion is the total number of voting entitlements within the Laguna Quays Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate held by the holders of those voting entitlements? [3] The answers to these questions largely depend on whether subsequent stages of the development came about through amendments to the initial scheme, as the respondents contend, or through the approval of subsequent stages, as the appellants contend. [4] The initial scheme, which is set out in Schedule 1 to the order in Council of 1 May 1992, contains the following provision in respect of voting entitlements: 4. The Voting Entitlements of Members of the Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate. The total voting entitlements of members of the Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate shall be 950 votes. This figure 1 Laguna Quays Resort Principal Body Corporate v Laguna Quays Resort Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate & Ors [2013] QSC 303 at [4].

4 4 has been calculated on the basis of the anticipated use that the proprietors or users of the lands within the site will have of the Primary Thoroughfare Precinct. The voting entitlements of the proprietor or proprietors of land within the precincts shall be apportioned as follows:- Golf Course Precinct 150 Golf Lodge Precinct 325 Administration Precinct 25 First Residential Precinct (Principal Body Corporate) [5] The initial scheme stated that the development was divided into the four precincts described above and the primary thoroughfare precinct. The initial scheme has been amended or new stages of the scheme have been approved, from time to time. There are now five stages. Stages 2 and 3 are of particular relevance for present purposes. [6] A notice in the Government Gazette of 15 July 1994 notified the approval of the Laguna Quays Resort Scheme of Integrated Development Stage 2, pursuant to s 9(1) of the Act. The Governor in Council, on 25 January 1995, approved the Laguna Quays Resort Scheme of Integrated Development Stage 3 pursuant to s 9(1) of the Act. [7] The stage 2 scheme, as appears from the Integrated Resort Development (Approval of New Stage and Amendments) Notice (No 1) 2005 (published in the Queensland Government Gazette on 27 May 2005), applies to an area shown on the Integrated Resort Development Plan The scheme land is divided into marina commercial, western commercial and primary thoroughfare precincts. The provision for voting entitlements is as follows: 2. The Voting Entitlements of New Members of the Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate. On registration of the initial plan or plans of subdivision in Stage 2 of the Laguna Quays Resort, the total voting entitlements of members of the Laguna Quays Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate shall be 1,146. The voting entitlements of the proprietor or proprietors of land within the Stage 2 precincts shall be apportioned as follows: - Marina Commercial Precinct 156 Western Commercial Precinct These voting entitlements have been apportioned on the basis of the anticipated use that the proprietors or users of lands and facilities within Stage 2 of the Laguna Quays Resort will make of the Primary Thoroughfare Precincts. (emphasis added)

5 5 [8] The 27 May 2005 notice also shows the division of the stage 3 scheme into a second residential precinct, a secondary thoroughfare precinct and a primary thoroughfare precinct. Voting entitlements were stated as follows: 2. The Voting Entitlements of New Members of the Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate. On registration of the initial plan or plans of subdivision in Stage 3 of the Laguna Quays Resort, the total voting entitlements of members of the Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate shall be The voting entitlements of the proprietor or proprietors of land within Stage 3 precincts shall be apportioned as follows:- Second Residential Precinct 284 These voting entitlements have been apportioned on the basis of the anticipated use that the proprietors or users of lands and facilities on Stage 3 of the Laguna Quays Resort will make of the Primary Thoroughfare Precincts. The maximum number of residential lots/units shall not exceed the number of voting entitlements. (emphasis added) The respondents contentions [9] The respondents contentions may be summarised as follows. Stages 2 and 3 were approved as amendments to stage 1 rather than as subsequent stages. That may be seen from the fact that the Order in Council in respect of each of the stage 2 and stage 3 amendments stated that the approval was pursuant to s 9(1) of the Act. [10] Section 9, which is in Division 2 Part 2 of the Act, concerns the amendment of approved schemes. It provides: 9 Application for amendment of approved scheme (1) An application for amendment of an approved scheme may be made to the Minister by the primary thoroughfare body corporate or, if that body has not been incorporated, by the applicant. (2) To remove any doubt, it is declared that an application may be made under this division to amend an approved scheme by varying the boundaries of the site of the approved scheme. [11] The fact that the developer did not register plans of subdivision for stages 2 and 3 is consistent with their being amendments to stage 1 rather than individual new schemes in their own right. I digress to deal with this contention. It is impossible to tell what reasons or incentives the developer may or may not have had for acting as it did. It may be that it took the view that registration of the plans may have involved it or associates or related entities in higher scheme levies. The point lacks substance.

6 6 [12] It was then submitted that, as the initial approvals in respect of stages 2 and 3 are of amendments to the scheme, s 108 of the Act applies. It provides for voting entitlements in respect of the land the subject of these two approvals and the provisions of s 108 must prevail over any conflict between those provisions and the scheme provisions. Section 108 does not make voting entitlements dependent on registration of plans of subdivision for later scheme stages. Section 108 provides: Voting entitlements (1) Until land within a precinct, other than a residential precinct or the primary thoroughfare precinct, is subdivided, the proprietor of that land as a member of the primary thoroughfare body corporate shall have a voting entitlement as set out in the approved scheme in respect of that precinct. (2) Until the incorporation of the principal body corporate, the proprietor or proprietors of land within the residential precincts shall have the voting entitlement as set out in the approved scheme in respect of those precincts. (3) When the land comprising a precinct, other than a residential precinct or the primary thoroughfare precinct, is subdivided the voting entitlement for that precinct shall be apportioned by notice in writing by the proprietor of the land given to the primary thoroughfare body corporate amongst parcels thereby created and a proprietor of a parcel shall as a member of the primary thoroughfare body corporate have the voting entitlement apportioned in respect of that parcel. (4) In like manner the voting entitlement of a proprietor of land that is further subdivided shall be apportioned amongst the parcels thereby created and the proprietor of each parcel shall have the relevant voting entitlement so apportioned. (5) Immediately upon the incorporation of the principal body corporate (a) the proprietor or proprietors referred to in subsection (2) shall cease to have those voting entitlements; and (b) the principal body corporate shall have those voting entitlements. [13] The primary judge rejected the appellants argument that the approvals in respect of stages 2 and 3 were approvals of subsequent stages under s 26 of the Act. That section provides: 26 Application for subsequent stages (1) A subsequent application may be made under part 2, division 1 in relation to all or only part of the future development area. (2) The future development area (whether all or part) that is the subject of a subsequent application under part 2, division 1 is in this Act referred to as a subsequent stage.

7 7 (3) Subject to subsection (4), part 2, division 1 applies to an application for approval of a subsequent stage. (4) The applicant must include with the application for approval of a subsequent stage (a) the information and material set out in clauses 1 to 12, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 21 of schedule 1, part A; and (b) such of the information and material set out in schedule 1, part B as the Minister requires. (5) An application under this section may only be made if all necessary amounts have been paid to, undertakings given to, or securities lodged with, the local government under an agreement entered into between the applicant and the local government. (6) A person must not use construction works that have been undertaken in a future development area unless the works are situated in a subsequent stage that has been approved under part 2, division 1. Maximum penalty 200 penalty units. (7) Applications in relation to stages in a future development area may be made at any time and from time to time. (8) For the purposes of this Act, an approval of an application made under this section is taken to be an approval of a scheme. (9) For the purposes of part 5, the land in a subsequent stage is taken to be the site. [14] The primary judge also rejected the appellants argument, based on the terms of the approvals set out above, that changes in voting entitlements would take place only upon the registration of the plans. The primary judge s reasons state, in this regard: 2 [52] The defendants acknowledge that the proprietors of land forming those precincts became members of Primary, but submit that they have no voting entitlements. The defendants place reliance on the terms of the approval and the use of the words on registration as indicating that the increase in the total voting entitlements in Primary by 196 was deferred until such time as a plan of subdivision in the stage had been registered. The defendants argument is simple and attractive. But, in my view, it reads s 108(1) in isolation and without regard to its apparent purpose. Section 108(1) relates to land within an existing precinct which is part of an approved scheme. It concerns voting entitlements in respect of that precinct before the land within a precinct is subdivided. Such land may never be subdivided. 2 Laguna Quays Resort Principal Body Corporate v Laguna Quays Resort Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate & Ors [2013] QSC 303 at [52] [53].

8 8 [53] The owner of land in such a precinct might be expected to have an interest in the affairs of the scheme and to benefit from the maintenance of the primary thoroughfare (and any improvements on it) and the payment of rates and other liabilities incurred by the primary thoroughfare body corporate in administering the primary thoroughfare for the benefit of its members. On the defendants interpretation, the owner of a commercial precinct is a member of the primary thoroughfare body corporate but does not have a voting entitlement (and a consequential obligation to contribute by way of a levy). (citations omitted) [15] The primary judge also stated in this regard: 3 [61] A plan of subdivision in Stage 2 has not been registered. But this does not alter the fact that Stage 2 is a precinct in an approved scheme and that the proprietor of land within a commercial precinct in that stage has the voting entitlement set out in the approved scheme in respect of that precinct until the land within the precinct is subdivided. Such a proprietor may choose to operate its commercial precinct and not subdivide it. There is no apparent obligation to subdivide. The proprietors of and users of lands and facilities in that commercial precinct will make use of the primary thoroughfare and be a member of Primary, but, according to the defendants, have no voting entitlements and no consequential obligation to contribute to the liabilities of Primary of which it is a member. [16] The primary judge s reasons were embraced by the respondents. Consideration [17] I regret that I am unable to agree with the primary judge s conclusions. Even if, assuming in favour of the respondents, the approvals were of amendments to the initial scheme under Division 2 rather than approvals of subsequent stages under s 26, s 108 would not be applicable. Section 108(2) is concerned with the position of the proprietor of land within a residential precinct prior to incorporation of the principal body corporate. The principal body corporate existed prior to the creation of the schemes for stages 2 and 3. [18] Subsections (1) and (3) do not apply either. They provide for circumstances in which land within a precinct (in the case of subsection (1)) or land comprising a precinct (in the case of subsection (3)) is subdivided. The parties accepted that the land the subject of approvals for stages 2 and 3 was all contained in the future development area shown on the future development plan for the development. 4 A future development area is not a precinct. Precinct is defined as part of a site identified in an approved scheme as a precinct. 3 4 Laguna Quays Resort Principal Body Corporate v Laguna Quays Resort Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate & Ors [2013] QSC 303 at [61]. Referred to in the Order in Council approved by the Governor in Council on 30 April 1992.

9 9 [19] The respondents contended that the Court should be reluctant to question the accuracy of the statements in the Queensland Government Gazette that the approvals for stages 2 and 3 were given pursuant to s 9 of the Act. It was pointed out that: the subject notices were required by the Act to be published in the Gazette; once received into evidence the notices were evidence that the approval of the Governor in Council was given pursuant to s 9 of the Act; no evidence was adduced on the trial by the appellants with a view to challenging the correctness of the statement in the notices; and the applications were not in evidence. [20] These contentions have merit but when the content of the Gazetted notices is considered, it becomes apparent that the references to s 9(1) are erroneous. The approvals could not have been pursuant to s 9(1). That subsection authorises applications for amendment of approved schemes to be made to the Minister by the primary thoroughfare body corporate. The primary judge observed that the reference in the Gazette notices to approval being pursuant to s 9(1) should be understood as approval of an amendment application made pursuant to s 9. Subsection (2) of s 9 is, however, even less relevant for present purposes than subsection (1). It declares that an application under Part 2 Division 2 may be made to amend an approved scheme by varying the boundaries of the site of the approved scheme. It was not suggested that any site boundaries were affected by the subject applications. [21] As the primary judge pointed out, it is s 13 that empowers the Governor in Council to approve amendment applications. Where an amendment application is approved, s 13(2) requires the Chief Executive to notify the approval of the amendment by a Gazette notice that specifies the modifications, if any, made by the approval. [22] Not only do the subject notifications not specify modifications made by the approvals, their language and effect is consistent with notification of an approval under s 26 and inconsistent with the notification of approval of an amendment application under s 13. The notice for the stage 2 approval is described as the Laguna Quays Resort (Approval of Scheme) Notice (No. 1) There is a heading Approval of Scheme above paragraph 3 of the notice which states: 3. Pursuant to section 9(1) of the Integrated Resort Development Act 1987, the Laguna Quays Resort Scheme of Integrated Development Stage 2 has been approved by the Governor in Council, subject to the conditions set out in the Schedule. [23] Paragraph 4 of the notice states that a copy of the approved scheme is available for inspection. There is a schedule of Conditions Attaching to the Scheme which imposes requirement[s] of this approved Scheme. [24] The scheme for stage 2 is described in it as the Scheme of Integrated Resort Development and states that it applies to the area shown on the Laguna Quays Resort Stage 2 Scheme of Integrated Resort Development Plan ( ). It states that the scheme of integrated resort development is divided into three precincts: (a) (b) (c) Marina Commercial; Western Commercial; Primary Thoroughfare.

10 10 [25] It then proceeds to explain the role and permitted uses of the three precincts. Voting Entitlements of New Members of the Primary Thoroughfare Body Corporate are provided for and Conditions Attaching to the Scheme are specified. [26] The approval and schemes in respect of the stage 3 amendment have a similar format and wording. Although, in a practical sense, schemes 2 and 3 affect the operation of the stage 1 scheme, they do not purport to amend it. The language of the approvals of the stages 2 and 3 schemes and the wording of the stage 2 and 3 schemes is quite inconsistent with the applications for and approvals of amendments to the initial scheme. [27] It is instructive to have regard to the Queensland Government Gazette of 27 May 2005, headed Integrated Resort Development (Approval of New Stage and Amendments) Notice (No. 1) 2005 which relevantly provides: Amendment of Previous Orders and Approval of Scheme 4. In this Notice - Pursuant to Section 13 of the Integrated Resort Development Act 1987, the Governor in Council has approved an application for amendment of the Laguna Quays Resort Approved Scheme of Integrated Resort Development Stage 2. Pursuant to Section 13 of the Integrated Resort Development Act 1987, the Governor in Council has approved an application for amendment of the Laguna Quays Resort Approved Scheme of Integrated Resort Development Stage 3. Pursuant to Section 7 of the Integrated Resort Development Act 1987, the Governor in Council has approved the Laguna Quays Resort Scheme of Integrated Resort Development Stage 4. [28] The document gave notice of amendment to the approved schemes for stages 2 and 3 and approved the stage 4 scheme. Its language in respect of the amendment of the stage 2 and 3 schemes is the sort of language that would have been used in respect of the initial stage 2 and 3 approvals, had they been approvals of amendments to stage 1. [29] The respondents contended that the erroneous reference to s 9 resulted from a renumbering of sections in the Act in the reprint which took effect on 29 April In the earlier version of the Act the section numbered 9 contained the provisions now in s 7. It addressed approvals of schemes. It will be recalled that s 26(8) provides that an approval of an application under s 26 is to be taken as an approval of a scheme. The appellants pointed out that, although the stage 2 approval was given very shortly after 29 April 1994, the stage 3 approval was some six months later. That delay may have helped in avoiding confusion resulting from the renumbering of sections of the Act but it is just as likely that the stage 2 documentation was used as a precedent for stage 3 and perpetuated the stage 2 error. In any event, whatever the reason for the reference to s 9(1), it is apparent from the foregoing discussion that the stage 2 and 3 approvals were not approvals of amendments to the stage 1 scheme.

11 11 [30] There is also merit in the appellants argument that the primary judge s construction of s 108 fails to have sufficient regard to the words the voting entitlement as set out in the approved scheme in subsection (2). In each of the stage 2 and stage 3 schemes, the voting entitlement is stated to arise on registration of the initial plan or plans of subdivision in the particular stage. The reference to such plan or plans is plainly a reference to what is referred to in each of the stage 2 and 3 schemes as the Laguna Quays Resort Stage [ ] Scheme of Integrated Resort Development Plan. No such plan was registered for stage 2 or stage 3. [31] There was no challenge to the primary judge s findings that s 134 and s 137 were applicable to the determination of the voting entitlements in respect of stages 4 and 5 as those stages were approved as subsequent stages and not by way of amendment to an existing approved scheme. The primary judge concluded that, by operation of those sections, the coming into existence of the stages 4 and 5 schemes had no effect on voting rights. There was no challenge to those findings either. Conclusion [32] For the above reasons, the appeal should be allowed. [33] Contrary to the requirements of Practice Direction 2 of 2010, the appellants outline of argument did not set out the form of order sought by the appellants should the appeal be allowed. Moreover, no submissions were made in that regard on the hearing of the appeal. [34] I would order that: 1. The appeal be allowed. 2. The order made on 7 November 2013 be set aside. 3. The first and second respondents pay the appellants costs of and incidental to the application for the determination of separate questions including the costs of the hearing in that regard and the costs of the appeal. [35] I would direct that the appellants, within seven days of today s date, after consultation with the respondents legal representatives, provide to the Registrar draft minutes of order reflecting these reasons which deal with the questions in the form of declarations. [36] ATKINSON J: I agree with the reasons for judgment of Muir JA and the orders proposed by his Honour. [37] DALTON J: I agree with the orders proposed by Muir JA, and with his reasons.

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Westfield Ltd v Stockland (Constructors) P/L & Ors [2002] QCA 137 PARTIES: WESTFIELD LTD ACN 000 317 279 (applicant/applicant) v STOCKLAND (CONSTRUCTORS) PTY LIMITED

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Three P/L v Body Corporate for Savoir Faire Community Titles Scheme 3841 [2008] QCA 167 PARTIES: THREE PTY LTD ACN 069 497 516 (respondent/plaintiff/respondent) v

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Brisbane City Council v Gerhardt [2016] QCA 76 PARTIES: BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL (applicant) v TREVOR WILLIAM GERHARDT (respondent) FILE NO/S: Appeal No 8728 of 2015

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: In the matter of: ACN 103 753 484 Pty Ltd (in liq) formerly Blue Chip Development Corporation Pty Ltd [2011] QSC 64 TERRY GRANT VAN DER VELDE AND DAVID MICHAEL

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Perpetual Limited v Registrar of Titles & Ors [2013] QSC 296 PARTIES: PERPETUAL LIMITED (ACN 000 431 827) (FORMERLY KNOWN AS PERPETUAL TRUSTEES AUSTRALIA LIMITED (ACN

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Martinek Holdings Pty Ltd v Reed Construction (Qld) Pty Ltd [2009] QCA 329 PARTIES: MARTINEK HOLDINGS PTY LTD ACN 106 533 242 (applicant/appellant) v REED CONSTRUCTION

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Jackson-Knaggs v Queensland Newspapers P/L [2005] QCA 145 MARK ANDREW JACKSON-KNAGGS (applicant/respondent) v QUEENSLAND BUILDING SERVICES AUTHORITY (first

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: FILE NO/S: No 3696 of 2018 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Midson Construction (Qld) Pty Ltd & Ors v Queensland Building and Construction Commission

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Castillon v P & O Ports Ltd [2005] QCA 406 PARTIES: LEONARD CASTILLON (plaintiff/respondent) v P & O PORTS LIMITED ACN 000 049 301 (defendant/appellant) FILE NO/S:

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: A Top Class Turf Pty Ltd v Parfitt [2018] QCA 127 PARTIES: A TOP CLASS TURF PTY LTD ACN 108 471 049 (applicant) v MICHAEL DANIEL PARFITT (respondent) FILE NO/S: Appeal

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Cousins v Mt Isa Mines Ltd [2006] QCA 261 PARTIES: TRENT JEFFERY COUSINS (applicant/appellant) v MT ISA MINES LIMITED ACN 009 661 447 (respondent/respondent) FILE

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Doolan and Anor v Rubikcon (Qld) Pty Ltd and Ors [07] QSC 68 SANDRA DOOLAN AND STEPHEN DOOLAN (applicants) v RUBIKCON (QLD) PTY LTD ACN 099 635 275 (first

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: O Keefe & Ors v Commissioner of the Queensland Police Service [2016] QCA 205 CHRISTOPHER LAWRENCE O KEEFE (first appellant) NATHAN IRWIN (second appellant)

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Pilot Farm Holdings Pty Ltd v Inbiz Investments Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Pilot Farm Unit Trust [2011] QSC 99 PILOT FARM HOLDINGS PTY LTD (applicant) v INBIZ

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Tynan & Anor v Filmana Pty Ltd & Ors (No 2) [2015] QSC 367 PARTIES: DAVID PATRICK TYNAN and JUDITH GARCIA TYNAN (plaintiffs) v FILMANA PTY LTD ACN 080 055 429 (first

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: The Proprietors Rosebank GTP 3033 v Locke & Anor [2016] QCA 192 PARTIES: THE PROPRIETORS ROSEBANK GTP 3033 (appellant) v JEREMY LOCKE (first respondent) CAMBRIDGE

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Witheyman v Van Riet & Ors [2008] QCA 168 PARTIES: PETER ROBERT WITHEYMAN (applicant/appellant) v NICHOLAS DANIEL VAN RIET (first respondent) EKARI PARK PTY LTD ACN

More information

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF QUEENSLAND PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Waterman & Ors v Logan City Council & Anor [2018] QPEC 44 NORMAN CECIL WATERMAN AND ELIZABETH HELEN WATERMAN AS TRUSTEE UNDER INSTRUMENT

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: David & Gai Spankie & Northern Investment Holdings Pty Limited v James Trowse Constructions Pty Limited & Ors [2010] QSC 29 DAVID & GAI SPANKIE & NORTHERN

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Gillam v State of Qld & Ors [2003] QCA 566 PARTIES: GORDON WILLIAM GILLAM (applicant/respondent) v STATE OF QUEENSLAND through Q BUILD (first respondent) WATPAC LIMITED

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: DPP (Cth) v Corby [2007] QCA 58 PARTIES: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (COMMONWEALTH) (applicant) v SCHAPELLE CORBY (respondent) FILE NO/S: Appeal No 1365 of 2007

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Aria Property Group P/L v Maroochy Shire Council & Ors [2008] QCA 169 PARTIES: ARIA PROPERTY GROUP LTD ACN 104 265 652 (respondent/applicant) v MAROOCHY SHIRE COUNCIL

More information

Queensland LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT ACT 2003

Queensland LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT ACT 2003 Queensland LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT ACT 2003 Act No. 2 of 2003 Queensland LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION AMENDMENT ACT 2003 TABLE OF PROVISIONS Section Page PART 1 PRELIMINARY 1 Short title....................................................

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Conveyor & General Engineering Pty Ltd v Basetec Services Pty Ltd and Anor [2014] QSC 30 CONVEYOR & GENERAL ENGINEERING PTY LTD ACN 091 865 235 (Applicant)

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: ACN 060 559 971 Pty Ltd v O Brien & Anor [2007] QSC 91 PARTIES: FILE NO/S: BS51 of 2007 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ACN 060 559 971 PTY LTD (ACN 060 559 971) (formerly ABEL

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Eyears v Zufic [2016] QCA 40 PARTIES: MARINA EYEARS (applicant) v PETER ZUFIC as trustee for the PETER AND TANYA ZUFIC FAMILY TRUST trading as CLIENTCARE SOLICITORS

More information

ARTHUR ROBINSON & HEDDERWICKS. Building Bill EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM PART I-PRELIMINARY

ARTHUR ROBINSON & HEDDERWICKS. Building Bill EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM PART I-PRELIMINARY ARTHUR ROBINSON & HEDDERWICKS LIBRARY Building Bill EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM PART I-PRELIMINARY Clause 1 states that the purpose of the Bill is to provide for the regulation of building and building standards.

More information

THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ACT, 1988

THE NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA ACT, 1988 1 INTRODUCTION For the development, maintenance and management of national highways the National Highways act, 1956 (48 of 1956) was enacted. Under the provisions of this Act the Central Government had

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Bradforth [2003] QCA 183 PARTIES: R v BRADFORTH, Nathan Paul (applicant) FILE NO/S: CA No 423 of 2002 SC No 551 of 2002 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT:

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Burragubba & Anor v Minister for Natural Resources and Mines & Anor (No 2) [2017] QSC 265 ADRIAN BURRAGUBBA (first applicant) LINDA BOBONGIE, LESTER BARNADE,

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Anderson v Langdon & Anor [2018] QCA 297 PARTIES: STEPHEN JOHN ANDERSON (applicant) v SCOTT DAVID HARRY LANGDON AND JARROD LEE VILLANI as joint and several liquidators

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Schepis & Anor v Esanda Finance Corp Ltd & Anor [2007] QCA 263 PARTIES: ANTHONY SCHEPIS (first plaintiff/first appellant) MICHELE SCHEPIS (second plaintiff/second

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Bettson Properties Pty Ltd & Anor v Tyler [2018] QSC 153 PARTIES: BETTSON PROPERTIES PTY LTD ACN 009 873 152 AND TOBSTA PTY LTD ACN 078 818 014 (applicants) v PAULINE

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Oliver v Samios Plumbing Pty Ltd [2016] QCA 236 PARTIES: DANIEL FREDERICK OLIVER TRADING AS TOP PLUMBING (applicant) v SAMIOS PLUMBING PTY LTD ACN 010 360 899 (respondent)

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: State of Queensland v O Keefe [2016] QCA 135 PARTIES: STATE OF QUEENSLAND (applicant/appellant) v CHRISTOPHER LAURENCE O KEEFE (respondent) FILE NO/S: Appeal No 9321

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Gladstone & District Leagues Club Ltd v Hutson & Ors [2007] QSC 010 GLADSTONE & DISTRICT LEAGUES CLUB LIMITED ACN 010 187 961 (applicant) v ROBERT HUTSON

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Forsyth & Ors v Big Gold Corporation Ltd & Ors (No 2) [2017] QSC 314 PARTIES: FILE NO/S: No 9817 of 2016 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ALEXANDER CAMERON FORSYTH (first plaintiff)

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Andrews v BDS Technical Services P/L & Anor [2003] QSC 469 GRANT JASON ANDREWS v BDS TECHNICAL SERVICES PTY LTD ACN 010 645 619 (first respondent) NETWORK

More information

Strata Schemes Management Amendment Act 2004 No 9

Strata Schemes Management Amendment Act 2004 No 9 New South Wales Strata Schemes Management Amendment Act 2004 No 9 Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Amendment of Strata Schemes Management Act 1996 No 138 2 4 Amendment of other Act and

More information

WATER SUPPLY AGREEMENT

WATER SUPPLY AGREEMENT Replenishing Groundwater Since 1965 Northern Division Office ABN: 42 671 751 039 Southern Division Office 112 Airdmillan Rd, AYR Q 4807 28 Ninth Street, HOME HILL Q 4806 PO Box 720, AYR Q 4807 PO Box 376,

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Gough & Ors v South Sky Investments Pty Ltd [2012] QCA 161 JOHN MACLAIN GOUGH NORMA PATRICIA GROVES (first appellants) LINEMINT PTY LTD ACN 010 972 559 DERICK

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: FILE NO: 6923 of 2003 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Holland & Anor. v. Queensland Law Society Incorporated & Anor. [2003] QSC 327 GREGORY IAN HOLLAND

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Tropac Timbers P/L v A-One Asphalt P/L [2005] QSC 378 PARTIES: TROPAC TIMBERS PTY LTD ACN 108 304 990 (plaintiff/respondent v A-ONE ASPHALT PTY LTD ACN 059 162 186

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Donovan v Donovan [09] QSC 26 PARTIES: LYNDA JANE DONOVAN (AS EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF RONALD JOSEPH DONOVAN) (applicant/cross-respondent) v HELGA DONOVAN (AS EXECUTOR

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Gemini Nominees Pty Ltd v Queensland Property Partners Pty Ltd ATF The Keith Batt Family Trust [2007] QSC 20 PARTIES: GEMINI NOMINEES PTY LTD (ACN 011 020 536) (plaintiff)

More information

Water Compliance Reporting Manual

Water Compliance Reporting Manual Water Compliance Reporting Manual Water Services Act 01 October 017 ME_111781660_1 (W007) Economic Regulation Authority 017 This document is available from the Economic Regulation Authority s website at

More information

Supplement No. published with [Extraordinary Gazette] No. dated, 2012.

Supplement No. published with [Extraordinary Gazette] No. dated, 2012. CAYMAN ISLANDS Supplement No. published with [Extraordinary Gazette] No. dated, 2012. A BILL FOR A LAW TO AMEND THE STRATA TITLES REGISTRATION LAW (2005 REVISION) IN ORDER TO CHANGE THE TYPES OF RESOLUTIONS

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Ericson v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2014] QCA 297 IAN JAMES ERICSON (applicant) v QUEENSLAND BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION COMMISSION (respondent)

More information

Trustee and Trustee Companies (Amendment) Act 1995

Trustee and Trustee Companies (Amendment) Act 1995 Act 1995 No. 104 of 1995 Section 1. Purpose 2. Commencement TABLE OF PROVISIONS PART 1 PRELIMINARY PART 2 AMENDMENTS TO THE TRUSTEE ACT 1958 3. Definitions 4. Substitution of Part I 5. Consequential Amendments

More information

RESTATED AND AMENDED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF PINE RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.

RESTATED AND AMENDED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF PINE RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. RESTATED AND AMENDED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF PINE RIDGE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. Pursuant to the provisions of section 617.1007, Florida Statues, the undersigned Florida not for profit corporation

More information

Sample Only, Subject to Copyright

Sample Only, Subject to Copyright Corporations Act 2001 A Company Limited by Shares Constitution of Sample SMSF Company Pty Ltd Copyright Smartcorp Copyright in this document belongs to Smartcorp. No part of this document may be copied

More information

That the meetings of creditors of each of the TRUA companies, being:

That the meetings of creditors of each of the TRUA companies, being: Minutes of Meeting of Creditors of Toys R Us (Australia) Pty. Ltd. ACN 057 455 026 (TRU) Babies R Us (Australia Pty. Ltd. ACN 073 394 117 (BRU) (both Administrators Appointed) (Collectively, TRUA or the

More information

An Act to amend the Public Works Act Public Works Amendment 1963, No; , No. 42

An Act to amend the Public Works Act Public Works Amendment 1963, No; , No. 42 398 Public Works Amendment 1963, No; 42 Title L Short Title 2. Interpretation 3. Notices and objections 4. Limited access roads ANALYSIS 5. Assessment of compensation 6. Claimants acts mltking execution

More information

Queensland Law Society Administration Rule 2005

Queensland Law Society Administration Rule 2005 Queensland Law Society Administration Rule 2005 Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 5 Part 6 Part 7 Schedule 1 Preliminary Solicitors Practising Certificates External Intervention Legal Practitioners Fidelity

More information

KATESTONE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT

KATESTONE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT KATESTONE CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT DATE [insert date] AGREEMENT NO. [insert agreement #] PARTIES Katestone Environmental Pty Ltd ACN 097 270 276 16 Marie Street Milton QLD 4064 Fax No.: (07) 3369

More information

Industrial Relations (Child Employment) Act 2006 No 96

Industrial Relations (Child Employment) Act 2006 No 96 New South Wales Industrial Relations (Child Employment) Act 2006 No 96 Contents Part 1 Preliminary Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Definitions 2 Division 1 Conditions of employment 4 Employer to

More information

Poliducto Frontera REPRESENTATIONS. a) It s a company duly incorporated and organized pursuant the laws of Mexico;

Poliducto Frontera REPRESENTATIONS. a) It s a company duly incorporated and organized pursuant the laws of Mexico; PETROLEUM PRODUCTS FIRM TRANSPORTATION SERVICES AGREEMENT (THE AGREEMENT ) ENTERED INTO BY AND BETWEEN SISTEMA DA, S. DE R.L. DE C.V. (THE CARRIER ) AND (THE SHIPPER ), PURSUANT THE FOLLOWING REPRESENTATIONS

More information

2013 CHAPTER P

2013 CHAPTER P CHAPTER P-16.101 An Act respecting Pooled Registered Pension Plans and making consequential amendments to certain Acts 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Short title 2 Interpretation 3 Application 4 Rules respecting

More information

Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000

Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 New South Wales Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 His Excellency the Governor, with the advice of the Executive Council, has

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Matrix Projects (Qld) Pty Ltd v Luscombe [2013] QSC 4 PARTIES: MATRIX PROJECTS (QLD) PTY LTD ACN 089 633 607 trading as MATRIX HOMES (Applicant) v TONY JASON LUSCOMBE

More information

Child Protection (Offenders Prohibition Orders) Act 2004 No 46

Child Protection (Offenders Prohibition Orders) Act 2004 No 46 New South Wales Child Protection (Offenders Prohibition Orders) Act 2004 No 46 Contents Part 1 Part 2 Preliminary Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Definitions 2 Child protection prohibition orders

More information

Consumer Claims Act 1998 No 162

Consumer Claims Act 1998 No 162 New South Wales Consumer Claims Act 1998 No 162 Contents Page Part 1 Preliminary 1 Name of Act 2 Commencement 3 Definitions 4 Persons presumed to be consumers 5 Notes Part 2 Consumer claims 6 Application

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: John Holland Pty Ltd v TAC Pacific Pty Ltd & Ors [2009] QSC 205 PARTIES: FILE NO: BS 2388 of 2009 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: JOHN HOLLAND PTY LIMITED

More information

Adjudication Application (South Australia) Made under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2009 (SA)

Adjudication Application (South Australia) Made under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2009 (SA) Adjudication Application (South Australia) Made under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2009 (SA) Please complete all details of this application where applicable Application

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Haley & Anor v Roma Town Council; McDonald v Romijay P/L & Ors [2005] QCA 3 ALEXANDER JOHN HALEY (first applicant/first respondent) BENTILLI PTY LTD ACN 071

More information

Federal Court and Federal Circuit Court Regulation 2012

Federal Court and Federal Circuit Court Regulation 2012 Federal Court and Federal Circuit Court Regulation 2012 Select Legislative Instrument No. 280, 2012 as amended made under the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia

More information

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF QUEENSLAND PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Phipps v The Chief Executive Department of Local Government, Infrastructure and Planning and Phipps v Somerset Regional Council and Anor

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Re Floyd [2011] QSC 218 PARTIES: KELLY FLOYD (applicant) FILE NO/S: SC No 6068 of 2011 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Trial Division Application Supreme

More information

The Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act, Amendments appended: 23 of 1972, 22 of 1994, 29 of 2007

The Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act, Amendments appended: 23 of 1972, 22 of 1994, 29 of 2007 The Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act, 1961 Act 37 of 1961 Keyword(s): Holder of any Landed Land, Survey, Survey Mark Amendments appended: 23 of 1972, 22 of 1994, 29 of 2007 DISCLAIMER: This document is

More information

THE TRADE UNIONS ACT, 1926

THE TRADE UNIONS ACT, 1926 THE TRADE UNIONS ACT, 1926 1 [16 OF 1926] An Act to provide for the registration of Trade Unions and in certain respects to define the law relating to registered Trade Unions 2 [***]. WHEREAS it is expedient

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: The Queen v Hall [2018] QSC 101 PARTIES: THE QUEEN v GRAHAM WILLIAM McKENZIE HALL (defendant) FILE NO: Indictment No 0348/18 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT:

More information

Data Protection Act 1998

Data Protection Act 1998 Data Protection Act 1998 1998 CHAPTER 29 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS Part I Preliminary 1. Basic interpretative provisions. 2. Sensitive personal data. 3. The special purposes. 4. The data protection principles.

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: No BS2028 of 2005 State of Queensl v Walter Construction Group & Ors [2005] QSC 241 EHS LANDSCAPING PTY LTD ACN 101 392 689 (plaintiff) v WALTER CONSTRUCTION

More information

GLOBAL-ROAM SOFTWARE LICENCE AGREEMENT 1) LICENCE

GLOBAL-ROAM SOFTWARE LICENCE AGREEMENT 1) LICENCE GLOBAL-ROAM SOFTWARE LICENCE AGREEMENT This is a legal Agreement between GLOBAL-ROAM Pty Ltd (ACN 091 533 587) and the Licensee for the use of the Software. By ordering, downloading, installing, or using

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Queensland Nickel Sales Pty Ltd v Glencore International AG & Anor [2016] QSC 269 QUEENSLAND NICKEL SALES PTY LTD (applicant) v GLENCORE INTERNATIONAL AG

More information

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT ACT, B I L L. No. 113 An Act to amend The Planning and Development Act, 2007

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT ACT, B I L L. No. 113 An Act to amend The Planning and Development Act, 2007 1 B I L L No. 113 An Act to amend The Planning and Development Act, 2007 (Assented to ) HER MAJESTY, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan, enacts as follows: Short

More information

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Caratti v Commissioner of Taxation [2016] FCA 754 File number: NSD 792 of 2016 Judge: ROBERTSON J Date of judgment: 29 June 2016 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE application

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Shorten v Bell-Gallie [2014] QCA 300 PARTIES: IAN RODGER WILLIAM SHORTEN (applicant) v SHIRLEY BELL-GALLIE (respondent) FILE NO/S: Appeal No 11869 of 2013 QCAT Appeal

More information

Design and Construct Contract - Standard User Funding Agreement

Design and Construct Contract - Standard User Funding Agreement QCA Draft 8 September 2014 Aurizon Network Pty Ltd [insert Trustee] Design and Construct Contract - Standard User Funding Agreement (amended form of AS 4902-2000) Ref: QRPA15047 9101397 11391098/5 L\313599357.2

More information

CHAPTER 28:04 VALUATION FOR RATING PURPOSES ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PART II

CHAPTER 28:04 VALUATION FOR RATING PURPOSES ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PART II Valuation for Rating Purposes 3 CHAPTER 28:04 VALUATION FOR RATING PURPOSES ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY SECTION 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. 3. Chief Valuation Officer etc. PART

More information

Sectional Titles Act, 95 of 1986

Sectional Titles Act, 95 of 1986 Sectional Titles Act, 95 of 1986 Preamble Date of Commencement: 1 June 1988 ACT To provide for the division of buildings into sections and common property and for the acquisition of separate ownership

More information

Carbon Pricing Bill A BILL. int i t u l e d

Carbon Pricing Bill A BILL. int i t u l e d Carbon Pricing Bill Bill No. /18. Read the first time on 18. A BILL int i t u l e d An Act to provide for obligations in relation to the reporting of, and the payment of a tax in relation to, greenhouse

More information

The Saskatchewan Applied Science Technologists and Technicians Act

The Saskatchewan Applied Science Technologists and Technicians Act SASKATCHEWAN APPLIED SCIENCE 1 The Saskatchewan Applied Science Technologists and Technicians Act being Chapter S-6.01* of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1997 (Sections 1 to 47 effective October 20, 1998;

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Baden-Clay [2013] QSC 351 PARTIES: THE QUEEN (Applicant) FILE NO/S: 467 of 2013 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: v GERARD ROBERT BADEN-CLAY (Respondent)

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: FILE NO: 13832/10 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: Queensland Harness Racing Limited & Ors v Racing Queensland Limited & Anor [2012] QSC 34 QUEENSLAND HARNESS RACING

More information

1965, No. 64. BE IT ENACTED by the General Assembly of New Zealand in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

1965, No. 64. BE IT ENACTED by the General Assembly of New Zealand in Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows: 1965, No. 64 Valuation of Land Amendment 667 Title 1. Short Title 2. Rates-postponement values 3. Special rateable values of industrial or commercial land in residential or rural areas 4. Consequential

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Taylor v Company Solutions (Aust) Pty Ltd [2012] QSC 309 PARTIES: FILE NO/S: 12009 of 2010 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: DAVID JAMES TAYLOR, by his Litigation Guardian BELINDA

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Kelly [2018] QCA 307 PARTIES: R v KELLY, Mark John (applicant) FILE NO/S: CA No 297 of 2017 DC No 1924 of 2017 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of

More information

ACQUISITION OF LAND ACT

ACQUISITION OF LAND ACT 539 ACQUISITION OF LAND ACT 1967-1969 Acquisition of Land Act of 1967, No. 48 Amended by Acquisition of Land Act Amendment Act 1969, No. 33 An Act to Consolidate and Amend the Law Relating to the Acquisition

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: KAV v Magistrate Bentley & Anor [2016] QSC 46 PARTIES: KAV (Applicant) v MAGISTRATE BENTLEY (First Respondent) and ALV (Second Respondent) FILE NO/S: SC No 513 of

More information

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Stankovic v SS Family Pty Ltd & Anor [2018] QDC 54 PARTIES: MILJAN STANKOVIC (Plaintiff/Respondent) v SS FAMILY PTY LTD ACN 117 147 449 (Trading as Trendbuild ) (Defendant/Applicant)

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Body Corporate for Sun City Resort CTS 24674 v Sunland Constructions Pty Ltd & Ors (No 2) [2011] QSC 42 BODY CORPORATE FOR SUN CITY RESORT CTS 24674 (plaintiff)

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Natcraft P/L & Anor v Det Norske Veritas & Anor [2002] QCA 284 PARTIES: NATCRAFT PTY LTD ACN 010 592 775 (deregistered) (First Plaintiff/First Appellant) HENLOCK PTY

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Jones v Aussie Networks Pty Ltd [2014] QSC 126 PARTIES: FILE NO/S: 12056/13 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: RHYS EDWARD JONES (applicant) v AUSSIE NETWORKS PTY LTD ABN 44 124

More information

980 No. 91] Town and Oountry Planning [1953

980 No. 91] Town and Oountry Planning [1953 980 No. 91] Town and Oountry Planning [1953 NEW ZEALAND Title. 1. Short Title and co=encement. 2. Interpretation. PART I ANALYSIS REGIONAL PLANNING SCHEMES 3. General purpose of regional planning schemes.

More information

An Act to amend the Mining Act

An Act to amend the Mining Act FIRST SESSION THIRTY-SEVENTH LEGISLATURE Bill 13 (2003, chapter 15) An Act to amend the Mining Act Introduced 20 June 2003 Passage in principle 29 October 2003 Passage 12 December 2003 Assented to 18 December

More information

Construction Industry Long Service Leave Act 1997

Construction Industry Long Service Leave Act 1997 Version No. 010 Construction Industry Long Service Leave Act 1997 Version incorporating amendments as at 1 March 2005 TABLE OF PROVISIONS Section Page PART 1 PRELIMINARY 1 1. Purpose 1 2. Commencement

More information

VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CIVIL DIVISION DOMESTIC BUILDING LIST VCAT Reference: D401/2004 CATCHWORDS

VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CIVIL DIVISION DOMESTIC BUILDING LIST VCAT Reference: D401/2004 CATCHWORDS VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CIVIL DIVISION DOMESTIC BUILDING LIST VCAT Reference: D401/2004 CATCHWORDS Domestic building joinder test to be satisfied. APPLICANT: Radan Constructions Pty

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: FILE NO/S: DIVISION: PROCEEDING: Vadasz v Bloomer Constructions (Qld) Pty Ltd [2009] QSC 261 MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER VADASZ TRADING AS AUSTRALIAN PILING COMPANY

More information

BHP Steel Employee Share Plan Trust Deed

BHP Steel Employee Share Plan Trust Deed BLAKE DAWSON WALDRON L A W Y E R S BHP Steel Employee Share Plan Trust Deed BHP Steel Limited ABN 16 000 011 058 BHP Steel Share Plan Pty Ltd ACN 101 326 336 Dated 12 July 2002 Level 39 101 Collins Street

More information