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

Rosily v Telstra Browns Plains[2019] QCATA 3

Rosily v Telstra Browns Plains[2019] QCATA 3

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Rosily v Telstra Browns Plains [2019] QCATA 3

PARTIES:

GILA ROSILY

(applicant/appellant)

v

TELSTRA BROWNS PLAINS

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

APL115-18

ORIGINATING APPLICATION NO/S:

MCD02122/17

MATTER TYPE:

Appeals

DELIVERED ON:

7 January 2019

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Paratz

ORDERS:

  1. The application for leave to appeal or appeal filed on 30 May 2018 is dismissed pursuant to Direction 2 of the Appeal Directions dated 31 August 2008.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL – PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – QCAT – where an application for a minor civil dispute was dismissed – where no grounds of appeal were stated and no submissions as to any errors of fact and/or law were made – where directions were made providing for the application to be dismissed if the directions were not complied with – where the directions were not complied with and the application for leave to appeal or appeal was dismissed

REPRESENTATION:

 

Applicant:

Self–represented

Respondent:

No appearance

APPEARANCES:

 

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

REASONS FOR DECISION

  1. [1]
    Gila Rosily filed a claim against Telstra Browns Plains in the minor civil disputes jurisdiction of the Tribunal in November 2017, claiming the amount of $600.
  2. [2]
    The application was heard by a panel of Justices of the Peace, and an order was made as follows:

The application is dismissed.

  1. [3]
    Ms Rosily filed an Application for Leave to Appeal or Appeal on 30 May 2018. The application was blank in Part C ‘Grounds of appeal', and also blank in Part D ‘Orders sought’.
  2. [4]
    Directions were given on 11 June 2018 requiring Ms Rosily to file an affidavit of service of the application for leave to appeal or appeal, and to file a copy of submissions detailing the alleged error/s of fact and/or law made by the original decision maker, and any further submissions in support of the application, by 4:00 pm on 27 July 2018.
  3. [5]
    Ms Rosily did not file material as directed on 11 June 2018, and further directions were made on 31 August 2018 extending the time for compliance to 4:00 pm on 21 September 2018, and providing that if she did not comply with that direction, that the application for leave to appeal or appeal may be dismissed without further notice to the parties.
  4. [6]
    Ms Rosily did not comply with the directions made on 31 August 2018, and I ordered in an On the Papers Hearing on 24 October 2018 as follows:

The application for leave to appeal or appeal filed 30 May 2018 is dismissed pursuant to Direction 2 of the Appeal Directions dated 31 August 2018.

  1. [7]
    Ms Rosily filed a request for reasons on 6 November 2018 requesting reasons for my order made on 24 October 2008. These are my reasons.
  2. [8]
    No grounds of appeal are set out in the application for leave to appeal or appeal, and Ms Rosily has not filed any material that relates to the appeal directions.
  3. [9]
    Ms Rosily did file an affidavit of herself on 2 July 2018. The affidavit appears to re-ventilate matters concerning the minor civil dispute claim heard by the Justices of the Peace. The affidavit does not identify any error of fact or law made by the Justices of the Peace.
  4. [10]
    There have therefore not been any errors of fact and/or law alleged, or which are the subject of submissions by Ms Rosily.
  5. [11]
    Direction 2 of the Directions made on 31 August 2018 provided that if Ms Rosily did not provide submissions as previously directed, that the application for leave to appeal or appeal may be dismissed with further notice to the parties.
  6. [12]
    When the matter came before me for an On the Papers Hearing, no further material had been filed. There was therefore no basis on which the appeal could succeed, and I made an order dismissing the application as foreshadowed by Direction 2 of the directions made on 31 August 2018.
Close

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    Gila Rosily v Telstra Browns Plains

  • Shortened Case Name:

    Rosily v Telstra Browns Plains

  • MNC:

    [2019] QCATA 3

  • Court:

    QCATA

  • Judge(s):

    Member Paratz

  • Date:

    07 Jan 2019

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.