Briridge Pty Ltd t/as Civic Video Springfield; v Carter Hall Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2)

[2013] QCAT 533

CITATION: Briridge Pty Ltd t/as Civic Video Springfield
v Carter Hall Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] QCAT 533

PARTIES: Briridge Pty Ltd t/as Civic Video Springfield
(Applicant)
v
Carter Hall Holdings Pty Ltd
(Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER: RSL043-13

MATTER TYPE: Retail shop leases matters

HEARING DATE: 14 October 2013

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: James White, Member

DELIVERED ON: 14 October 2013

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE: 1.   Application to Strike Out is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS: Application to Strike Out – Abuse of Process – where previous Notice of Dispute was withdrawn.

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION:

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

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. The Applicant for strike out is Charter Hall Holdings Pty Ltd, the Respondent to the current proceedings, RSL 034-11. The sole ground of the application is that Briridge Pty Ltd, the Applicant to the current proceedings, previously filed a Notice of Dispute, RSL 006-11 which was subsequently withdrawn. Charter Hall submits that the current proceedings are an abuse of process.

1. In respect to the previous proceedings RSL 006-11, it is noted that Senior Member Kerrie O’Callaghan, directed, “the Notice of Dispute is withdrawn”.

1. The Tribunal did not determine the matter and there were no findings or reasons given. The Notice of Dispute did not eventuate in a final hearing. It was, on the face of it, simply withdrawn.

1. To be an abuse of process, the Notice of Dispute would need to be a frivolous or vexatious action or had been already decided by a competent court.[1] The current proceedings do not constitute a rehearing of the previous proceedings, as there was no final hearing or determination in the previous proceedings.

[1]        Osborne P.J., p 4, A Concise Law Dictionary, Sweet & Maxwell, 1964.

1. There are substantive issues to be determined, including but not limited to questions relating to audit reports, outgoings and advertising costs.

1. It is clear to me that the current proceedings are not an abuse of process.

1. Accordingly, the Application is dismissed.