Queensland Building Services Authority v Beatty
[1999] QDC 60
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
- Queensland Building Services Authority v Beatty[1999] QDC 60
- Add to List
Queensland Building Services Authority v Beatty[1999] QDC 60
Queensland Building Services Authority v Beatty[1999] QDC 60
IN THE DISTRICT COURT | Application No 845 of 1999 |
HELD AT BRISBANE
QUEENSLAND
[Before Forde DCJ]
[Qld Bldg Services Authority v AJ Beatty]
BETWEEN:
QUEENSLAND BUILDING SERVICES AUTHORITY | Applicant |
AND:
ALAN JAMES BEATTY | Respondent |
JUDGMENT
Judgment delivered: | 16 April 1999 |
Catchwords: | Costs - Appeals. Respondent awarded certificate under the Appeals Costs Fund Act 1973. |
Counsel: | W. Cochrane for the Applicant D. Boddice for the Respondent |
Solicitors: | Barker Gosling for the Applicant Carne and Herd for the Respondent |
IN THE DISTRICT COURT HELD AT BRISBANE QUEENSLAND | Application No 845 of 1999 |
BETWEEN:
QUEENSLAND BUILDING SERVICES AUTHORITY | Applicant |
AND:
ALAN JAMES BEATTY | Respondent |
JUDGMENT - ARGUMENT ON COSTS - FORDE D.C.J.
Delivered the 16th day of April, 1999
Introduction
Judgment was given in this matter on the 30th day of March 1999. The applicant was successful in relation to the application for leave and in relation to the substantive appeal. In the ordinary course costs should follow the event. This court is empowered to make an order in respect of costs pursuant to s.94(4)(c) of the Queensland Building Services Authority Act 1991 (“the Act”); see Queensland Building Services Authority v McGrath & Anor, decision of Boulton DCJ, dated 1st April 1998 and Queensland Building Services Authority v Roddenberry, decision of Robin Q.C. DCJ, dated 10th day of November 1998.
Part of the reasoning in the judgment referred to the erroneous findings by the Tribunal in relation to previous decisions of the Tribunal and obiter of Judges of this court. The respondent argued both before this court and also before the Tribunal consistently with those earlier cases. An application for a certificate under the Appeals Cost Fund Act 1973 has been made on behalf of the respondent. In my view, the respondent by its legal advisers did not lead the Tribunal into error but rather referred to the relevant authorities which existed at that stage. In that event it seems appropriate that the respondent be granted a certificate in respect of his own costs and the costs ordered to be paid by him to the applicant.
The orders will be:
- (a)That the Respondent pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to the application for leave and the appeal to be taxed;
- (b)That the Respondent be granted a certificate pursuant to the Appeal Costs Fund Act 1973 in respect of the costs to be paid by him to the applicant and in respect of his own costs of and incidental to the application for leave and the appeal to be taxed.