The applicant, Antico Holdings Pty Ltd, sought to amend the Crown Lease Purpose Clause for a property to allow an “Indoor recreation facility LIMITED to a gym/fitness centre” to operate in units owned by the applicant.


Only one owner, Mr Lewis, ultimately opposed this variation. Section 166 of the Unit Titles Act 2001 (ACT) (as it then was) provided that such a variation application may only be made if all the members of the owners corporation have been given notice of the proposed application and the application is authorised by an unopposed resolution of a general meeting.


The Applicant sought an order under section 125(1)(g) of the Unit Titles Act (as it then was) which empowered ACAT to make an order giving effect to an unsuccessful motion for a resolution of a general meeting if ACAT is satisfied that opposition to the motion was unreasonable. Mr Lewis objected to the motion on the basis of noise, security, costs to the owners, alleged conflicts of interest between the strata manager and the applicant and a lack of benefit to the owners.


ACAT addressed each of these objections and found, in relation to each as well as overall, that it was not reasonable to oppose the motion and gave effect to the unsuccessful motion (which was taken to have been passed as an unopposed resolution).