"It should perhaps be noted briefly that the possibility of the plaintiff operating a hotel from Aurora Tower was so slight as to be disregarded by any sensible person. The building is not suitable for use as a hotel. It does not have sufficient lifts, storage space, staff quarters or vehicular access to function as a hotel. This was accepted by all parties. The first defendant cannot sensibly have thought that the plaintiff, or Oaks, would conduct a hotel from the tower."
Quote from Supreme Court Decision
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/qld/QSC/2007/264.html
But Aurora is now an Oaks Hotel:
Brisbane TimesBook Aurora Here
No comments:
Post a Comment