Cooper v O'Connor

Case [2016] QCATA 180


CITATION: Cooper v O’Connor [2016] QCATA 180  
PARTIES: Peter Wayne Cooper
(Applicant/Appellant)
v
Neil Francis O’Connor
(Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER: APL109 -16
MATTER TYPE: Appeals
HEARING DATE: On the papers
HEARD AT: Brisbane
DECISION OF: Senior Member Stilgoe OAM
DELIVERED ON: 15 November 2016
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
ORDERS MADE:

1.    Leave to appeal granted.

2.    The appeal is allowed.

3.    The decisions of the tribunal dated 4 March 2015, 31 March 2015, 20 May 2015 and 25 January 2016 are set aside.

4.    The application for minor civil dispute – dividing fences filed 13 January 2015 is dismissed.

5.    Peter Cooper shall pay Neil O’Connor’s costs of and incidental to the appeal.

6.    Peter Cooper shall file and serve submissions as to the appropriate Scale for assessing costs by 4:00 pm on 2 December

7.    Neil O’Connor shall file and serve submissions in response by 4:00 pm on 16 December 2016.

8.    The tribunal shall decide the question of costs based on the parties’ submissions and without the parties appearing at a hearing.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL – REAL PROPERTY – BOUNDARIES OF LAND AND FENCING – FENCES AND FENCING – NOTICE – where notice to contribute for fencing work – where fencing work not done – where applicant wanted order about fencing work – whether notice to contribute valid – whether notice to contribute in fact an agreement to fence – whether tribunal had jurisdiction – whether error of law – whether grounds for leave to appeal

APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL – PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – PARTIES AND REPRESENTATION – where respondent property held in joint names – where tribunal joined deceased – whether error of law – whether grounds for leave to appeal

APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL – PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE OR TERRITORY COURTS – JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – AMENDING VARYING AND SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – where applicant submitted tribunal had no jurisdiction to make orders – where applicant failed to engage in tribunal proceeding – where application for leave to appeal filed out of time – where applicant could not explain delay – whether orders should be set aside

APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL – PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE OR TERRITORY COURTS - COSTS – DEPRIVING SUCCESSFUL PARTY OF COSTS – CONDUCT OF PARTY OR PROCEEDING – DELAY – DELAY IN EXERCISING RIGHTS -
where applicant failed to engage in tribunal proceeding – where application for leave to appeal filed out of time – where applicant could not explain delay – whether tribunal should be entitled to costs of the appeal

Appeal Costs Fund Act 1973 (Qld) s 15
Neighbourhood Disputes (Dividing Fences and Trees) Act 2001 (Qld) s 30(2), 32, 30(3), 31(2)(a), 31(2)(c), 31(3), 31(6), 35(c),
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 3(b), s 28(3)(b), s 48(1)(a), s 61, s 100, s 102, s 122, s 132(2), s 132(4), s 133, s 134, s 135, s 138,…

Continue reading Cooper v O'Connor

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Cooper v O'Connor [2016] QCATA 180
Case
[2016] QCATA 180
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Cooper sought leave to appeal from the decisions of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales, which found against him in a dispute over the boundaries of land and the construction of a fence. The respondent, O'Connor, held his property in joint names with his deceased wife. Cooper argued that the notice to contribute for fencing work was invalid and that the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to make the orders it did. He also argued that the tribunal had incorrectly joined his deceased co-owner as a party. The tribunal had found that Cooper had not engaged in the proceedings and had filed his application for leave to appeal out of time, without explanation. O'Connor argued that the appeal should be dismissed and that he should be awarded costs for Cooper's delay.

The court considered whether Cooper had demonstrated that the tribunal had made an error of law and that there were grounds for leave to appeal. It found that Cooper had not demonstrated that the notice to contribute was invalid or that it amounted to an agreement to fence. The court also found that the tribunal had not erred in law in joining the deceased co-owner as a party. However, the court found that the tribunal had erred in law in making the orders it did, as Cooper had not engaged in the proceedings and had filed his application for leave to appeal out of time, without explanation. The court found that the tribunal should be entitled to costs for Cooper's delay.

The court allowed the appeal and set aside the decisions of the tribunal. It dismissed Cooper's application for minor civil dispute – dividing fences and ordered that he pay O'Connor's costs of and incidental to the appeal. The court ordered that the parties file and serve submissions as to the appropriate Scale for assessing costs and that the tribunal decide the question of costs based on the parties' submissions and without the parties appearing at a hearing. The court granted leave to appeal and allowed the appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Leave to appeal granted.

2. The appeal is allowed.

3. The decisions of the tribunal dated 4 March 2015, 31 March 2015, 20 May 2015 and 25 January 2016 are set aside.

4. The application for minor civil dispute – dividing fences filed 13 January 2015 is dismissed.

5. Peter Cooper shall pay Neil O’Connor’s costs of and incidental to the appeal.

6. Peter Cooper shall file and serve submissions as to the appropriate Scale for assessing costs by 4:00 pm on 2 December

7. Neil O’Connor shall file and serve submissions in response by 4:00 pm on 16 December 2016.

8. The tribunal shall decide the question of costs based on the parties’ submissions and without the parties appearing at a hearing.

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.