Question: What happens when a caretaker agreement includes vague wording like “or as required” and the caretaker and body corporate can’t agree on a definition?
We are in year 2 of a poorly executed 10-year Caretaker Agreement that was originally made between the scheme’s developer and the caretaker. The developer held power of attorney over the body corporate for the first 12 months.
The agreement includes a Schedule of Caretaking Services, which contains vague wording such as “Monthly Service (or as required).” The issue we’re facing is the interpretation of “or as required.”
The caretaker claims this means the service should be delivered at most once a month — only when necessary — and that their interpretation is “industry standard.” However, they cannot provide any written evidence to support this.
The body corporate believes the phrase means the service should occur at least monthly — and more often if required — as the standard minimum frequency.
There is no definition of “or as required” in the agreement, and we are now at a stalemate. Can anyone clarify which interpretation is more accurate or accepted in practice?
Answer: It can be difficult when different interpretations come into play.
We would need to review the whole contract to properly advise on this issue, because contracts do need to be read as a whole. However, we agree it can be difficult when different interpretations come into play.
In the absence of defined terms in an agreement, decision makers will often come back to the ordinary meaning of words or phrases. You’re possibly both a bit right and a bit wrong here. To us, “or as required” gives flexibility. The duty may need to be performed once a month, but it may require more or less frequent attention.
It depends on what the duty is and what the need is – really, there’s no need to do something that doesn’t need to be done. Let’s say, for example, pruning of trees was a duty to be performed “monthly (or as required)” – there is no utility in pruning a tree when it doesn’t need it just because you are required to prune it monthly. It could do more harm than good. However, in a different season, growth may be more rapid, and pruning may be required more frequently than once a month. Different trees might have different needs.
Ultimately, it is up to the caretaker to perform the duties required by the agreement; it’s not for the body corporate to dictate how. However, if the body corporate isn’t satisfied that those duties are being performed as required by the agreement, there are steps it can take.
As to the standard to be followed, the thing to remember is that it all comes back to what the terms of the agreement are.
If the stalemate can’t be overcome, and it’s affecting the common property, legal advice might be the next step.
This post appears in the August 2025 edition of The QLD Strata Magazine.
Jodie Graham Redchip Lawyers & Hynes Legal E: jodie.graham@hyneslegal.com.au P: 07 3193 0500