Queensland’s management rights landscape has frustrated body corporate committees for decades. Caretaking agreements run for up to 25 years. Performance obligations are often worded so loosely that enforcement is nearly impossible. And the formal dispute process is so complex, expensive, and uncertain that many committees simply give up. In a recent LookUpStrata webinar, strata lawyer Todd Garsden from Mahoneys walked through the full picture of management rights, from variations and extensions to assignments and remedial action notices, and offered a way of thinking about caretaker disputes that many committees have simply never considered.
The session covered far more ground than any single article can do justice to. Todd also walked through the full assignment process in detail, including what committees should be looking for when assessing a proposed buyer, how the document chain of title works and why it matters more than most owners realise, the implications of switching from an accommodation module to a standard module, and a wide range of practical Q&A that touched on some of the most common and frustrating situations committees face. The recording is worth watching in full.
QLD: Management rights – assignments, variations, extensions and remedial action notices – Apr 2026
Getting the process right matters more than most realise
Todd was clear that variations, extensions, and assignments each carry strict procedural requirements under the BCCMA. A general meeting is required for variations. Proxies cannot be used. The agenda must accurately explain the terms and effect of any change. For top-ups specifically, a secret ballot and a BCCM Form 20 are also required. Missing any of these steps can invalidate the process entirely.
The same scrutiny applies on the assignment side. Committees have always had the right to assess a proposed buyer’s character, competence, qualifications, and financial standing. Todd noted that committees are increasingly actually exercising those rights, which is a healthy development for the industry. But the 30-day response period only begins once the committee has received all the information it reasonably needs to make that assessment, not from the date the request is lodged.
A top-up is a negotiating opportunity, not just a motion to vote on
One of the more overlooked insights from the session was Todd’s point about extension and variation requests. When a caretaker submits a top-up, they are asking the body corporate for something. That puts the committee in a position of leverage that most never use.
Todd made the point that committees typically either approve or reject without realising they could be negotiating changes to the agreement at the same time, tightening up performance obligations, clarifying vague duty descriptions, or addressing known issues. Once that window closes, it doesn’t reopen until the next variation comes along. Given how rarely these opportunities arise in a 25-year agreement, the cost of not engaging is significant.
Before you reach for the RAN, understand what it can and can’t do
A remedial action notice is often treated as the ultimate lever a body corporate can pull when a caretaker is underperforming. Most committees assume it is a step towards termination. Todd was direct: it isn’t. The RAN is a prescribed process designed to get a manager to perform their duties, not to remove them. And even if every step is followed correctly, the process is heavily prescribed, technically demanding, and hard to enforce. Miss a step, use the wrong wording, or fail to document the breach adequately, and the whole process can unravel. But the deeper issue is what happens even if you get it right.
The commercial shortcut most committees overlook
If the caretaker has a financier, and most do, the financier has the right to step in and prevent termination, take control of the business and sell it. The body corporate ends up going through an assignment process regardless. So the question Todd posed was a practical one: if that’s the most likely outcome, why spend years in QCAT to get there?
Todd’s suggestion was disarmingly straightforward. Go to the table early. Have an honest conversation with the caretaker, acknowledge the relationship isn’t working, and negotiate a mutual exit. Agree to facilitate an assignment, and use that process to have genuine input into who comes in next.
Done well, this approach gets the committee to the same destination, a new caretaker, at a fraction of the time, cost, and stress of a formal dispute. As Todd noted, if you end up in QCAT you are forced into conciliation anyway. Leading with that conversation rather than ending up there by default is simply better for everyone involved, including the caretaker whose business value is being preserved rather than destroyed through a protracted legal battle.
Queensland’s management rights framework is genuinely complex, and the power imbalance committees often feel is real. But as Todd’s session made clear, there are more options available than most committees realise, and the smartest path forward is not always the most formal one.
Download the presentation
Download Todd’s slides from the presentation here: Management rights variations, extensions, assignment and remedial action notices
This article is based on the LookUpStrata webinar “Management Rights: Assignments, Variations, Extensions and Remedial Action Notices” presented by Todd Garsden, Strata Lawyer at Mahoneys.
Presenter
Todd Garsden
Mahoneys
E: tgarsden@mahoneys.com.au
P: 07 3007 3753
This post appears in Strata News #789.
Leave a Reply