373 resultados para Property Damage.
Resumo:
The Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 commenced on 1 July 2001. Significant changes have now been made to the Act by the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Amendment Act 2001 (“the amending Act”). The amending Act contains two distinct parts. First, ss 11-19 of the amending Act provide for increased disclosure obligations on real estate agents, property developers and lawyers together with an extension of the 5 business day cooling-off period imposed by the original Act to all residential property (other than contracts formed on a sale by auction). These provisions commenced on 29 October 2001. The remaining provisions of the amending Act provide for increased jurisdiction and powers to the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) enabling the Tribunal to deal with claims against marketeers. These provisions commenced on the date of assent, 21 September 2001.
Resumo:
A recent decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal involved an unusual statement of claim made on behalf of the developer of a proposed resort in Port Douglas. The decision is The Beach Club Port Douglas Pty Ltd v Page [2005] QCA 475. The issue The defendant had objected to a development application of the plaintiff developer and lodged an appeal in the Planning and Environment Court against the council decision granting a development permit. The main issue in the Planning and Environment Court was whether the site coverage of the proposed resort was excessive. In a separate action (the subject matter of the present appeal), the plaintiff developer claimed damages for ‘negligence’ alleging that the defendant had breached a duty of care not to appeal without properly or reasonably assessing whether the development qualified for a permit given that the resort qualified for the maximum allowable site coverage. It was alleged that the appeal lodged by the defendant in the Planning and Environment Court had no reasonable prospects of success and that any reasonable person properly advised would know, or ought reasonably to have known, that to be so. The defendant had been “put on notice” that the plaintiff would incur loss of $10,000 for every day there was a delay in starting construction of the resort. The claim made by the developer required the court to consider those circumstances where a person may lawfully and deliberately cause economic harm to another. Was a duty of care owed by the defendant for negligent conduct of litigation that caused economic loss to the plaintiff?
Resumo:
One of the many difficulties associated with the drafting of the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 (Qld) (‘the Act’) is the operation of s 365. If the requirements imposed by this section concerning the return of the executed contract are not complied with, the buyer and the seller will not be bound by the relevant contract and the cooling-off period will not commence. In these circumstances, it is clear that a buyer’s offer may be withdrawn. However, the drafting of the Act creates a difficulty in that the ability of the seller to withdraw from the transaction prior to the parties being bound by the contract is not expressly provided by s 365. On one view, if the buyer is able to withdraw an offer at any time before receiving the prescribed contract documentation the seller also should not be bound by the contract until this time, notwithstanding that the seller may have been bound at common law. However, an alternative analysis is that the legislative omission to provide the seller with a right of withdrawal may be deliberate given the statutory focus on buyer protection. If this analysis were correct the seller would be denied the right to withdraw from the transaction after the contract was formed at common law (that is, after the seller had signed and the fact of signing had been communicated to the buyer).
Resumo:
The Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 commenced on 1 July 2001. Significant changes have now been made to the Act by the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Amendment Act 2001 (“the amending Act”). The amending Act contains two distinct parts. First, ss 11-19 of the amending Act provide for increased disclosure obligations on real estate agents, property developers and lawyers together with an extension of the 5 business day cooling-off period imposed by the original Act to all residential property (other than contracts formed on a sale by auction). These provisions are expected to commence on 29 October 2001. The remaining provisions of the amending Act provide for increased jurisdiction and powers to the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) enabling the Tribunal to deal with claims against marketeers. These provisions commenced on the date of assent (21 September 2001).
Resumo:
This paper uses dynamic computer simulation techniques to develop and apply a multi-criteria procedure using non-destructive vibration-based parameters for damage assessment in truss bridges. In addition to changes in natural frequencies, this procedure incorporates two parameters, namely the modal flexibility and the modal strain energy. Using the numerically simulated modal data obtained through finite element analysis of the healthy and damaged bridge models, algorithms based on modal flexibility and modal strain energy changes before and after damage are obtained and used as the indices for the assessment of structural health state. The application of the two proposed parameters to truss-type structures is limited in the literature. The proposed multi-criteria based damage assessment procedure is therefore developed and applied to truss bridges. The application of the approach is demonstrated through numerical simulation studies of a single-span simply supported truss bridge with eight damage scenarios corresponding to different types of deck and truss damage. Results show that the proposed multi-criteria method is effective in damage assessment in this type of bridge superstructure.
Resumo:
This was the question that confronted Wilson J in Jarema Pty Ltd v Michihiko Kato [2004] QSC 451. Facts The plaintiff was the buyer of a commercial property at Bundall. The property comprised a 6 storey office building with a basement car park with 54 car parking spaces. The property was sold for $5 million with the contract being the standard REIQ/QLS form for Commercial Land and Buildings (2nd ed GST reprint). The contract provided for a “due diligence” period. During this period, the buyer’s solicitors discovered that there was no direct access from a public road to the car park entrance. Access to the car park was over a lot of which the Gold Coast City Council was the registered owner under a nomination of trustees, the Council holding the property on trust for car parking and town planning purposes. Due to the absence of a registered easement over the Council’s land, the buyer’s solicitors sought a reduction in the purchase price. The seller would not agree to this. Finally the sale was completed with the buyer reserving its rights to seek compensation.
Resumo:
Studying the rate of cell migration provides insight into fundamental cell biology as well as a tool to assess the functionality of synthetic surfaces and soluble environments used in tissue engineering. The traditional tools used to study cell migration include the fence and wound healing assays. In this paper we describe the development of a microchannel based device for the study of cell migration on defined surfaces. We demonstrate that this device provides a superior tool, relative to the previously mentioned assays, for assessing the propagation rate of cell wave fronts. The significant advantage provided by this technology is the ability to maintain a virgin surface prior to the commencement of the cell migration assay. Here, the device is used to assess rates of mouse fibroblasts (NIH 3T3) and human osteosarcoma (SaOS2) cell migration on surfaces functionalized with various extracellular matrix proteins as a demonstration that confining cell migration within a microchannel produces consistent and robust data. The device design enables rapid and simplistic assessment of multiple repeats on a single chip, where surfaces have not been previously exposed to cells or cellular secretions.
Resumo:
Infertility is a worldwide health problem with one in six couples suffering from this condition and with a major economic burden on the global healthcare industry. Estimates of the current global infertility rate suggest that 15% of couples are infertile (Zegers-Hochschild et al 2009) defined as: (1) failure to conceive after 12 months of unprotected sexual intercourse (i.e. infertility); (2) repeated implantation failure following ART cycles; or (3) recurrent miscarriage without difficulty conceiving (natural conceptions). Tubal factor infertility is among the leading causes of female factor infertility accounting for 7-9.8% of all female factor infertilities. Tubal disease directly causes from 36% to 85% of all cases of female factor infertility in developed and developing nations respectively and is associated with polymicrobial aetiologies. One of the leading global causes of tubal factor infertility is thought to be symptomatic (and asymptomatic in up to 70% cases) infection of the female reproductive tract with the sexually transmitted pathogen, Chlamydia trachomatis. Infection-related damage to the Fallopian tubes caused by Chlamydia accounts for more than 70% of cases of infertility in women from developing nations such as sub-Saharan Africa (Sharma et al 2009). Bacterial vaginosis, a condition associated with increased transmission of sexually transmitted infections including those caused by Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Mycoplasma genitalium is present in two thirds of women with pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). This review will focus on (1) the polymicrobial aetiologies of tubal factor infertility and (2) studies involved in screening for, and treatment and control of, Chlamydial infection to prevent PID and the associated sequelae of Fallopian tube inflammation that may lead to infertility and ectopic pregnancy.