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

Mulcahy v MacDonnells Law[2016] QCAT 257

Mulcahy v MacDonnells Law[2016] QCAT 257

CITATION:

Mulcahy v MacDonnells Law [2016] QCAT 257

PARTIES:

CATHERINE MULCAHY
(Applicant)

 

v

 

MacDONNELLS LAW
(Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

OCR238-14

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Justice Carmody

DELIVERED ON:

31 March 2016

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

  1. The application for miscellaneous matters is refused.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL – APPLICATION FOR MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS – where the applicant seeks leave to amend an application for leave to appeal.

Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) s 328

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 32

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

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]
    This is an application for miscellaneous matters, in which the applicant is seeking leave to add a counter-claim to a substantive application to the Tribunal. The substantive application seeks to set aside a costs agreement under s 328 of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) (“LPA”).
  2. [2]
    There are no particularised grounds for this counter claim. It would appear to be based on consequential losses the applicant claims to have incurred because of the costs agreement.
  3. [3]
    Section 328 of the LPA confers no jurisdiction on this Tribunal to grant additional compensation for losses flowing from an unreasonable, improper or otherwise unfair costs agreement. The extent of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction would be to reduce the amount of costs ultimately awarded. This would arise as a matter of evidence in the appeal hearing.
  4. [4]
    Out of fairness to the respondent, I do not think it is appropriate, at this late stage, to allow the applicant to raise new matters in the upcoming hearing that were not included in her originating application.
  5. [5]
    For this reason, the application for miscellaneous matters is refused.
Close

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    Mulcahy v MacDonnells Law

  • Shortened Case Name:

    Mulcahy v MacDonnells Law

  • MNC:

    [2016] QCAT 257

  • Court:

    QCAT

  • Judge(s):

    Justice Carmody

  • Date:

    31 Mar 2016

Appeal Status

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

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.