Craven v Kataria - [2024] QCATA 127

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Craven & Ors v Kataria & Ors [2024] QCATA 127

PARTIES:

GORDON JAMES CRAVEN

(first applicant/appellant)

JANET CRAVEN

(second applicant/appellant)

ANGELA LOUISE CRAVEN

(third applicant/appellant)

v

SAURAV KATARIA

(first respondent)

ASHLEIGH KATARIA

(second respondent)

S.N.A. GROUP PTY LTD

(third respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

APL305-23

ORIGINATING APPLICATION NO/S:

Q1363-23

MATTER TYPE:

Appeals

DELIVERED ON:

25 November 2024

HEARING DATE:

25 November 2024

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Senior Member Fitzpatrick

ORDERS:

1. The application for leave to appeal and appeal is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

LANDLORD AND TENANT – RESIDENTAL TENANCIES LEGISLATION - GENERALLY

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – RIGHT OF APPEAL – WHEN APPEAL LIES – ERROR OF LAW – GENERALLY – where a decision in a residential tenancy dispute dismissed the tenants’ claim for compensation – where the tenants found alternate accommodation before the hearing – where the appellant alleges unconscionable conduct on the part of the respondent – whether the filing of a Form 12 amounts to retaliatory conduct – whether the adjudicator showed characteristics of bias – whether the Australian Consumer Law applies to residential tenancy matters

Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) sch 2

Fair Trading Act 1989 (Qld) s 15, s 16
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 24, s 42, s 48, s 60, s 143, s 146, s 147, s 216, s 218, s 219

Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 (Qld) s 246A, s 291, s 326, s 415, s 416, s 426

Astill Legal Group Pty Ltd & Anor v Centrepoint Real Estate Pty Ltd t/as First National Centrepoint & Ors [2022] QCAT 399

Big4 Brisbane Northside Caravan Village v Schliebs [2012] QCAT 277
Cachia v Grech [2009] NSWCA 232
Cessnock City Council v 123 259 932 Pty Ltd (2024) 418 ALR 304
Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337
Glenwood Properties Pty Ltd v Delmoss Pty Ltd [1986] 2 Qd R 388
Johnson v Perez (1988) 166 CLR 351
Mazi v Community Housing (Qld) Pty Ltd [2023] QCATA 72

QUYD Pty Ltd v Marvass Pty Ltd [2009] 1 Qd R 41

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

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 21 September 2023 Gordon James Craven filed an application for leave to appeal or appeal from a decision made in the minor civil disputes jurisdiction of the Tribunal on 29 August 2023.

Parties to this appeal

The parties to an appeal are the parties in the Tribunal below.
Pursuant to s 42 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) ('QCAT Act’) I now correct the record to include as applicants in the appeal the other applicants in the proceeding below, Janet Craven and Angela Craven. I do so because those persons should be bound by or have the benefit of the proceeding; or their interests may be affected by the appeal…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Craven v Kataria

Details

AGLC: Craven v Kataria [2024] QCATA 127
Case: [2024] QCATA 127
Decision Date: 25 November 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Craven v Kataria involved the dispute between the tenant, Mr. Craven, and the landlord, Mr. Kataria. Mr. Craven sought compensation for various issues during his tenancy. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. Mr. Craven alleged that Mr. Kataria engaged in unconscionable conduct, particularly after filing a Form 12, which is a notice of intention to terminate a tenancy. Additionally, Mr. Craven argued that the tribunal adjudicator showed bias. The court was required to decide whether the filing of the Form 12 constituted retaliatory conduct and whether the adjudicator demonstrated bias. The court also had to determine whether the Australian Consumer Law applies to residential tenancy matters.

The court examined whether the filing of the Form 12 constituted retaliatory conduct and whether the adjudicator demonstrated bias. The court considered the evidence presented and concluded that the filing of the Form 12 did not amount to retaliatory conduct. The court further found that the adjudicator did not demonstrate any characteristics of bias. The court held that the Australian Consumer Law does not apply to residential tenancy matters, as such matters are governed by the Residential Tenancies Act 1995 (Vic). The court found no errors of law and dismissed the appeal. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal and the appeal were dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The application for leave to appeal and appeal is dismissed.

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.