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

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:

  1. No order is made as to costs.

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. [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. [2]
    The starting point for this Tribunal in considering costs is that each party usually bears their own costs,[1] unless this rule should be displaced in the interests of justice.[2]
  3. [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. [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. [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—

  1. (a)
    only if the party is a respondent against whom the tribunal has made a final decision; and
  1. (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).
  1. [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]
  2. [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.
  3. [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.

Footnotes

[1] QCAT Act, s 100.

[2] Ibid s 102.

[3] See ibid s 102(3)(c).

[4]Ibid Schedule 3, Dictionary. The prescribed amount is $25,000.

Close

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    Miranda Maszlik v Lorraine Palmer t/as Bundaberg Park Lodge

  • Shortened Case Name:

    Maszlik v Palmer

  • MNC:

    [2016] QCATA 94

  • Court:

    QCATA

  • Judge(s):

    Carmody J

  • Date:

    11 Apr 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.