QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CITATION:
Blunsdon & Ors v Govesis & Anor [2021] QCATA 91
PARTIES: JOHN ALBERT HENRY BLUNSDON (first applicant/appellant)
CLOVEDALE PTY LTD
(second applicant/appellant)
ALLISON HARVEY
(third applicant/appellant)
v
JOHN GOVESIS (first respondent)
TONY GOVESIS
(second respondent)
APPLICATION NO/S:
APL178-21
ORIGINATING APPLICATION NO/S:
MCDT557-21 Brisbane
MATTER TYPE:
Appeals
DELIVERED ON:
15 July 2021
HEARING DATE:
On the papers
HEARD AT:
Brisbane
DECISION OF:
Member Howe
ORDERS:
The termination order made on 7 April 2021 and the execution of the warrant of possession issued that day is stayed pending determination of the application for leave to appeal or appeal.
CATCHWORDS:
APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – STAY OF PROCEEDINGS – GENERAL PRINCIPLES AS TO GRANT OR REFUSAL – where a termination order was made by consent of the parties – where the tenants subsequently sought to appeal the consent order – where the tenants challenged the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to make a termination order by consent – where prospects of success of the appeal were limited – where the lessors had acted in dilatory fashion in protecting their own interests – where the lessors could commence new proceedings for termination after serving appropriate notices – where on balance a stay pending determination of the appeal was appropriate
Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 (Qld) s 277(2), s 277(5)
Cherwell Creek Coal Pty Ltd v BHP Queensland Coal Investments Pty Ltd & Ors [2019] QCA 276
Harvey v Phillips (1956) 95 CLR 235
Hajjar v 104 880 088 Group Holdings Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCA 298
APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:
Legacy Legal
Respondent:
Beaudesert Legal
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
On 9 March 2021 the second respondent to the application for leave to appeal commenced minor civil dispute – tenancy proceedings in the Tribunal at Brisbane seeking an order terminating the tenancy of the applicants to the application for leave to appeal (‘the applicants’) of a property owned by both respondents to the application for leave to appeal (‘the respondents’) south of Brisbane.
The application for termination was based on failure to pay rent. Exhibited to the minor civil dispute application was a Notice to Leave Form 12 given on behalf of the respondents to the applicants.
The termination application came on for hearing before an Adjudicator on 7 April 2021. Because of Covid, all parties appeared by telephone. Mr Blunsdon represented the tenants. A solicitor, Mr Tan, and Mr Tony Govesis represented the lessors.
The parties agreed to terminate the tenancy as from 30 June 2021. A consent order to that effect was made by the Tribunal and a warrant of possession issued effective as and from 1 July 2021, which latter step was a requirement of the legislation.
On 4 May 2021 the applicants filed an application for reopening and an application to stay the decision made 7 April 2021 and…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Blunsdon v Govesis and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2021] QCATA 91
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Court was required to decide whether to grant a stay of proceedings pending the determination of the appeal. The Court considered the general principles for granting or refusing a stay, including the balance of convenience and the prospects of success of the appeal. The Court found that, on balance, a stay was appropriate in this case. The Court noted that the appeal raised significant jurisdictional issues, and the tenants had a reasonable prospect of success on the appeal. The Court also found that the lessors had acted in a dilatory fashion in protecting their own interests, which weighed in favour of granting a stay.
The Court stayed the termination order made on 7 April 2021 and the execution of the warrant of possession issued that day pending determination of the application for leave to appeal or appeal. The Court found that the tenants had demonstrated a serious question to be tried on the appeal and that the balance of convenience favoured granting a stay. The Court noted that the lessors could easily commence new proceedings for termination after serving the appropriate notices, which reduced the risk of prejudice to the lessors if a stay was granted.
No further orders were made by the Court. The stay of proceedings remained in place until the appeal was determined or otherwise dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
The termination order made on 7 April 2021 and the execution of the warrant of possession issued that day is stayed pending determination of the application for leave to appeal or appeal.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.