An exclusivity promise in a Coolangatta medical-centre lease has left a neighbouring skin clinic facing an injunction, after a court found its operation breached the lease held by the established practice next door.
Inspired Medical runs the Coolangatta Medical Centre in suite 4 at 91 Griffith Street. The centre provides ordinary GP services, including skin cancer checks, excisions and biopsies, as well as travel vaccinations.
It purchased that business in May 2017 from the owner of the building, Dr Mohindra – a cosmetic physician – whose entity operated and continues to operate medical businesses in Suite 3.
Dr Mohindra’s business entity was the registered owner of two business names “Coolangatta Skin & Travel Doctors” and “Cosmetic Clinic”.
Inspired’s lease prevents the landlord from leasing another premises in the complex for use as a ‘medical centre’ without its consent. There was one stated exception: the Coolangatta Skin & Travel Doctors business ‘currently occupying Shop 3’.
In 2025, signs appeared outside suite 3 promoting skin cancer services and a doctors’ skin cancer clinic.
Inspired contended the new operation was different to the cosmetic clinic Dr Mohindra has previously conducted.
It argued the new operation was a ‘medical centre’ and outside the carve out exception contained in its exclusivity clause that was meant to prevent that type of competition.
The dispute turned on two questions. What did the lease term ‘medical centre’ mean? And was the business now trading from suite 3, the business being conducted from that suite when the lease was signed in 2017?
The contest came to the Supreme court before Justice Catherine Muir who found that the business in suite 3 was a ‘medical centre’ because it offered surgical and non-surgical skin cancer treatments through a GP.
She also found the current business was not the historic business described in the exception because it had not been conducted there in 2017.
She recognised that the name Coolangatta Skin & Travel Doctors in the carveout but concluded that the business that had been conducted on the premises in 2017 had been the other, Cosmetic Clinic.
That meant the landlord had breached the lease by leasing suite 3 for a use that included those additional skin and specialised medical services.
The judge concluded that the first respondent should be restrained from operating Coolangatta Skin & Travel Doctors from suite 3 for the duration of the suite 4 lease.
The case also produced a sharp caution about AI evidence. The applicant sought to rely on an affidavit setting out answers generated by ChatGPT about the ordinary meaning of ‘medical centre’. The Court rejected the evidence: the questions lacked the necessary context, the accuracy of the answers was unknown without checking their sources, and construing the lease was ultimately the Court’s task.
The judgment did not rule out AI for legal tasks but treated a chatbot answer as no substitute for the evidence and legal analysis needed for the commercial disputes.
Inspired Medical Pty Ltd v S Mohindra Pty Ltd [2026] QSC 78, Muir J, 30 April 2026.
