Brayalei Pty Ltd v ABC Scaffolds Pty Ltd

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Brayalei Pty Ltd v ABC Scaffolds Pty Ltd [2018] QCAT 299

PARTIES:

BRAYALEI PTY LTD ACN 093067737 T/AS OFFICE EXPERTS
(applicant)

v

ABC SCAFFOLDS PTY LTD ACN 100379973

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

MCDO50148-18 (Southport)

MATTER TYPE:

Other minor civil dispute matters

DELIVERED ON:

24 August 2018

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Southport

DECISION OF:

Adjudicator Alan Walsh

ORDERS:

The Application for minor civil dispute – minor debt, filed on 7 February 2018, is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – minor civil dispute – minor debt claim – where collection agent for applicant filed application for minor civil dispute minor debt at Tribunal’s Southport Registry – where collection agent not a party to application – where collection agent not granted leave to represent applicant

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – jurisdiction – exercise of jurisdiction – where corporate parties domiciled and carrying on business in New South Wales – where contract formed there – where claimed debt payable there – where one part of cause of action arose in Queensland – where otherwise no connection with Queensland – where respondent applied for dismissal of minor debt claim for lack of jurisdiction – where Tribunal adopted and applied rule 43 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) – whether Tribunal has jurisdiction – whether Tribunal should exercise jurisdiction in that event

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 11, s 12, s 43(2)(b)(iv), s 52
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, Schedule 3 – Dictionary
Service and Execution of Process Act 1992 (Cth), s 16,
s 20
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 35

Collier v Liebrecht [1983] 2 Qd R 726
Howard v Smith [2014] QCATA 103
Maschwitz v Searles [1903] St R Qd 238
Parcelvalue SA by its Australian Agent, Australian Commerce Systems Pty Ltd v Ozepost Pty Ltd [2015] QCAT 463
Lenard’s Pty Ltd & Anor v Kimart Pty Ltd & Ors [2009] QDC 150
St George Bank Limited v McTaggart [2003] 2 Qd R 568

REPRESENTATION:

Applicant:

Self-represented

Respondent:

Self-represented

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. Commercial collection agents provide a valuable service to the business community nationally for recovery of unpaid debts. Often that involves the commencement of legal proceedings with a view to obtaining judgment and execution.

2. Because Australia is a federation of States and Territories, not a unitary State, constitutional and jurisdictional constraints sometimes arise where litigants in other States seek redress through commercial agents in Queensland against respondent debtors who themselves do not reside in Queensland.

3. This decision is intended to provide some guidance to commercial agents and their interstate clients with respect to jurisdictional issues which may be replicated in other cases, in particular concerning whether and when proceedings ought be commenced in State of origin…