Cornell v Henderson

CITATION: Cornell v Henderson [2013] QCATA 001

PARTIES:	Karen-Anne Cornell (Applicant/Appellant)
v
Scott Joseph Henderson (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER: APL176-12

MATTER TYPE: Appeals

HEARING DATE: On the papers

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Richard Oliver, Senior Member

DELIVERED ON: 3 January 2013

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE: Leave to appeal is refused.

CATCHWORDS:

Minor civil dispute – Bias – where applicant was in dispute with the legal firm in which the decision maker was previously employed – where allegation of bias by the decision maker because of previous relationship with the legal firm – where no evidence of recognition between the applicant and the decision maker – where no objection or issue taken by the applicant during the course of the original hearing – where challenge to findings of fact – where findings open on the evidence

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009, s 142(3)

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009 (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. Mr Henderson rented a room at Oxley Drive, Runaway Bay.  The house was owned by Dr Kadrian and managed by the applicant Ms Cornell.  There were other tenants in the house who rented rooms; they included Charlotte Burdett and Samuel Lim.

1. On 15 November 2011 Mr Henderson was given a notice to leave the premises immediately.  The basis for the notice was, allegedly, his use and sale of illicit drugs.  He did not leave the premises.

1. As Mr Henderson was absent from the premises on 17 November 2011, Ms Cornell put together his possessions and removed them to the carport at the back of the house.  Mr Henderson then claims that his goods were taken by someone or stolen.  Included were his laptop computer, personal photographs, personal clothing and a bag of tools. 

1. As a consequence, he commenced a claim against the respondent for compensation in the sum of $4,311.70.  By the time the matter came to hearing, the claim was in fact reduced to $4,086.00 because one of the missing items, his wallet, had been returned to him.  Mr Henderson claims that his eviction was unlawful in that he was not given proper notice under the Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 firstly, to remedy a breach of the tenancy agreement if there was one, and secondly a failure to give a notice to leave. 

1. Ms Cornell contended that she acted lawfully under the Act because section 370 authorised her to give him a notice to leave immediately because she had a reasonable belief that he was using his accommodation for an illegal purpose, namely, using and selling illicit drugs.

1. The matter came on for hearing before a Tribunal Adjudicator on 29 February 2012.  Both parties gave evidence and in addition, Ms Cornell called witnesses, Charlotte Burdett and Samuel Lim to give evidence about the circumstances of moving Mr Henderson’s property from his room to the carport.  They both provided statements…