Maszlik v Palmer
[2016] QCATA 94
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Maszlik v Palmer[2016] QCATA 94
- Add to List
Maszlik v Palmer[2016] QCATA 94
Maszlik v Palmer[2016] QCATA 94
CITATION: | Maszlik v Lorraine Palmer t/as Bundaberg Park Lodge [2016] QCATA 94 | |
PARTIES: | Miranda Maszlik (Applicant/Appellant) v Lorraine Palmer t/as Bundaberg Park Lodge (Respondent) | |
APPLICATION NUMBER: | APL435-15 | |
MATTER TYPE: | Appeals | |
HEARING DATE: | On the papers | |
HEARD AT: | Brisbane | |
DECISION OF: | Justice Carmody | |
DELIVERED ON: | 11 April 2016 | |
DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane | |
ORDERS MADE: |
| |
CATCHWORDS: | LEAVE TO APPEAL – COSTS – whether the matter is a minor civil dispute Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 32, s 100, s 102 Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009 (Qld), r 83 | |
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
The claim for costs 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]By decision on 16 March 2016, the Tribunal dismissed the applicant’s application for leave to appeal. The parties were directed to file submissions as to costs. The respondent has filed submissions. The applicant has not done so, nor did she appear at her Tribunal hearing.
- [2]
- [3]The Tribunal agrees with the respondent’s submissions that the applicant’s stated grounds of appeal had no prospects of success for the simple reason that they failed to identify any error of fact or law in the original decision.[3]
- [4]However, the Tribunal may only make a costs order under s 102 of the QCAT Act pursuant to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009.
- [5]Rule 83 provides:
83 Costs that may be awarded for minor civil dispute other than minor debt claim
For section 102 of the Act, the tribunal may award costs against a party to a proceeding for a minor civil dispute other than a minor debt claim—
- (a)only if the party is a respondent against whom the tribunal has made a final decision; and
- (b)only to order the party to pay to the applicant the amount of any prescribed fee paid by the applicant on filing the application for the proceeding (emphasis added).
- [6]Under the QCAT Act, a minor civil dispute is a claim to recover a debt or liquidated demand of money, or a claim arising out of a contract between a trader and a consumer or 2 or more traders for payment of money not more than the prescribed amount.[4]
- [7]This matter related to the applicant’s non-payment of rent, and the deadlock this caused in her attempts to access her converted caravan. It is clearly a claim arising out of the contract between Ms Maszlik and Ms Palmer. At the hearing, the respondent said Ms Maszlik was approximately $11,000 in arrears of rental payments.
- [8]For the purposes of the Act, this is a minor civil dispute. Therefore, the Tribunal is unable to make any order as to costs.