Loading...
Queensland Judgments
Authorised Reports & Unreported Judgments
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
  • Unreported Judgment

Gorman v ALM Qld Pty Ltd

 

[2016] QCAT 273

CITATION:

Gorman v ALM Qld Pty Ltd [2016] QCAT 273

PARTIES:

Andrew Gorman

(Applicant)

 

v

 

ALM Qld Pty Ltd

(Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

BDL088-15

MATTER TYPE:

Building matters

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Senior Member Brown

DELIVERED ON:

27 June 2016

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

  1. The application for decision/order by consent filed by the Applicant on 24 June 2016 is refused.
  2. The directions made on 26 February 2016 are confirmed.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – CASE MANAGEMENT – GENERALLY – where application for decision/order by consent – where application refused

Queensland Civil Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 28

APPEARANCES:

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

  1. [1]
    On 27 June 2016 I refused an application for a decision/order by consent filed by the parties. Reasons for my decision have been requested.
  2. [2]
    Dr Gorman filed an application for a domestic building dispute on 7 May 2015. The matter progressed in the Tribunal in the usual fashion. On 22 February 2016 directions were made including listing the matter for an experts’ conclave on 11 July 2016 and for a directions hearing on 27 July 2016.
  3. [3]
    The application for a decision/order by consent sought two (2) directions: an amendment of the general direction nominating the time and date for the experts’ conclave and specifying the names of the experts attending; vacating the date for the directions hearing to a date after the receipt by the parties of the joint report following the experts’ conclave including an acknowledgement that the parties would be required to advise the Tribunal at the directions hearing as to whether a further conclave of experts would be required addressing costing issues.
  4. [4]
    Neither the Queensland Civil Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (‘QCAT Act’) nor the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009 (‘QCAT rules’) specifically provide for the making of decisions or orders by consent. The making of an order by consent involves the exercise of the Tribunal’s discretion. The Tribunal is not bound to make orders simply because the parties advise the Tribunal that they desire such orders. Orders are made when it is appropriate to do so. The Tribunal will consider, among other things, the utility of the orders, the general conduct of the proceeding, the interests of the parties, the interests of justice and the objects and functions of the Tribunal.
  5. [5]
    The conduct of a proceeding is at the discretion of the Tribunal.[1] The Tribunal must act fairly and according to the substantial merits of the case.
  6. [6]
    The application for a decision/order by consent was filed two weeks prior to the experts’ conclave. It was not, in my view, appropriate to make the orders sought prior to the conclave. The orders sought were procedural in nature, unnecessary and premature.
  7. [7]
    Effective case management by the Tribunal is necessary to ensure that proceedings are conducted consistent with the objects of the QCAT Act and the functions of the Tribunal in achieving those objects. This involves the making of targeted directions.
  8. [8]
    It was appropriate that the conclave proceed as directed. Any orders sought by the parties could be made following the conclave once the experts had completed the joint report or the issues in dispute had been clarified and any additional issues identified such that further, targeted, directions could be made.
  9. [9]
    For these reasons the application for a decision by consent was refused.

Footnotes

[1] QCAT Act s 28(1).

Close

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    Gorman v ALM Qld Pty Ltd

  • Shortened Case Name:

    Gorman v ALM Qld Pty Ltd

  • MNC:

    [2016] QCAT 273

  • Court:

    QCAT

  • Judge(s):

    Senior Member Brown

  • Date:

    27 Jun 2016

Appeal Status

Please note, appeal data is presently unavailable for this judgment. This judgment may have been the subject of an appeal.
Help

Require Technical Assistance?

Message sent!

Thanks for reaching out! Someone from our team will get back to you soon.

Message not sent!

Something went wrong. Please try again.