{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Ainsworth v Albrecht
Download as PDF
Download as Word
Highlights
My Notes
Collections
Create a New Collection
Overview
Full Text
{ tooltip = 'Copied'; setTimeout(() => tooltip = 'Copy Link', 2000); })" :data-tip="tooltip" class="tooltip tooltip-primary tooltip-bottom" class="cursor-pointer" role="button">
Details
Case
Agency Issuance Number
Published Date
Ainsworth v Albrecht
[2016] HCA 40
Tags
No tags available
Case
Ainsworth v Albrecht
[2016] HCA 40
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAFRENCH CJ,BELL, KEANE, NETTLE AND GORDON JJKJERULF AINSWORTH & ORS APPELLANTSANDMARTIN ALBRECHT & ANOR RESPONDENTSAinsworth v Albrecht[2016] HCA 4012 October 2016B37/2016ORDER1.Appeal allowed.2.Set aside the order of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Queensland made on 6 November 2015, except insofar as it orders in paragraph 1 that leave to appeal be granted, and in its place order that the appeal be dismissed with costs.3.The first respondent pay the appellants' costs of the appeal to this Court.On appeal from the Supreme Court of QueenslandRepresentationS S W Couper QC with K N Wilson QC for the appellants (instructed by Australian Property Lawyers)D R Gore QC with M J Batty for the first respondent (instructed by Mahoneys Lawyers)Submitting appearance for the second respondentNotice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSAinsworth v Albrecht Real property – Community titles scheme – Use of common property – Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (Q) – Dispute between owners of lots in community titles scheme – Where one lot owner sought to use common property airspace to expand balconies – Where proposal put to body corporate for alteration of rights of lot owners to allow lot owner exclusive use of common property – Where proposal required resolution without dissent – Where motion defeated – Where proponent applied for dispute resolution – Where adjudicator concluded that opposition by other lot owners to proposal unreasonable – Whether adjudicator...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Ainsworth v Albrecht
[2016] HCA 40
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAFRENCH CJ,BELL, KEANE, NETTLE AND GORDON JJKJERULF AINSWORTH & ORS APPELLANTSANDMARTIN ALBRECHT & ANOR RESPONDENTSAinsworth v Albrecht[2016] HCA 4012 October 2016B37/2016ORDER1.Appeal allowed.2.Set aside the order of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Queensland made on 6 November 2015, except insofar as it orders in paragraph 1 that leave to appeal be granted, and in its place order that the appeal be dismissed with costs.3.The first respondent pay the appellants' costs of the appeal to this Court.On appeal from the Supreme Court of QueenslandRepresentationS S W Couper QC with K N Wilson QC for the appellants (instructed by Australian Property Lawyers)D R Gore QC with M J Batty for the first respondent (instructed by Mahoneys Lawyers)Submitting appearance for the second respondentNotice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSAinsworth v Albrecht Real property – Community titles scheme – Use of common property – Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (Q) – Dispute between owners of lots in community titles scheme – Where one lot owner sought to use common property airspace to expand balconies – Where proposal put to body corporate for alteration of rights of lot owners to allow lot owner exclusive use of common property – Where proposal required resolution without dissent – Where motion defeated – Where proponent applied for dispute resolution – Where adjudicator concluded that opposition by other lot owners to proposal unreasonable – Whether adjudicator...
showFlash = false, 6000)"
>