If you think a long-standing body corporate approval makes your pet renovation bulletproof, a Gold Coast owner has some bad news for you. When fire safety is involved, the body corp gets the last word, especially when the agreement was made with on a handshake.

Back in 2010, the owner of a lot at Pacific Mansions in Runaway Bay got the body corporate’s blessing to build four steps from his balcony down to a narrow side path. Very handy: a quick hop across Oakland Parade and he was on the beach.

Then, in 2022, the building had a fire safety audit. The auditors identified that side path as an evacuation route. The steps narrowed the pathway below the required width and, it was decided by the inspectors, created a trip hazard for anyone fleeing in a hurry. The auditors said the route had to be at least a metre wide with nothing in the way. A separate workplace health and safety report rated the steps a medium risk.

The owner was offered a chance to propose a workaround, but any fix needed a sign-off from a registered building certifier, and he didn’t produce one. In November 2022 the committee voted seven-nil to remove the steps, and the scheme’s handyman had them gone the next day.

The owner went to adjudication with his own expert, who reckoned the side path wasn’t a fire exit at all because there was another way out. The adjudicator wasn’t swayed. Whether or not that path was strictly required as an escape route, the owner “has not established that the body corporate could not choose to do so.” In other words, a committee acting on two expert reports wasn’t being unreasonable.

He appealed to QCAT and lost again last month. Member Richard Oliver pointed out that preferring one expert over another is a question of fact, not law, so it couldn’t be argued again on appeal. The owner’s main grievance was that nobody told him exactly when the steps would disappear. That might attract some sympathy, but it wasn’t the decision being tested. The question was whether the resolution to remove the steps was reasonable, and it was.

So what’s the lesson? An old approval is not a permanent licence. When a fire auditor says something is blocking an escape route, a committee that acts on that advice is on solid ground. An owner arguing about what was “reasonable” back in 2010 is arguing the wrong point. You can’t negotiate with a fire.

And if you want to keep your stairs? Get the certifier’s report before the committee meets, not after.

Worth noting: There’s no by-law in this case, just a 2010 committee approval. The tribunal also didn’t rule that fire regulations override strata decisions. It held that the committee acted reasonably by following fire-audit advice, whether or not the path was legally mandatory.

Sources: Elsmore v Body Corporate for Pacific Mansions [2026] QCATA 159 – Queensland Judgments