Cullen v L.J. Hooker Bay Islands

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Cullen v L.J. Hooker Bay Islands  [2023] QCATA 92

PARTIES:

DEBRA CULLEN

(applicant/appellant)

v

L. J. HOOKER BAY ISLAND

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

APL204-22

ORIGINATING APPLICATION NO/S:

MCDT26-22

MATTER TYPE:

Appeals

DELIVERED ON:

11 July 2023

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Richard Oliver

ORDERS:

Leave to appeal is refused

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – RIGHT OF APPEAL – WHEN APPEAL LIES – RESIDENTIAL TENANCY – where applicant evicted from rental premises – where personal belonging remained at the residence for many months – where good disposed of by the lessor – where claim for compensation – whether value of goods exceed cost of removal and storage whether independent evidence as to value probative.

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 209 s 143(3)(a)(i)

Rintoul v State of Queensland & Ors [2018] QCA 20

Robinson Helicopter Company Incorporated v McDermott

[2016] HCA 22

Terera v Clifford [2017] QCA 181

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

1. This is an appeal from a decision of the Tribunal dismissing the applicant’s claim for compensation for the loss of her property and motor vehicle when, on 11 March 2021, she was evicted from the premises she was renting on Russell Island. She had left her possessions and car at the residence. She did not make any attempt or claim to try and retrieve her property until she contacted the respondent on 25 October 2021. By that stage her possessions had been disposed of so she filed an application for compensation in the Tribunal on 27 February 2022. It was defended and the matter went to hearing before a tribunal member on 9 June 2022. Her claim was dismissed.

2. Although the claim was made against the respondent, it was the managing agent for the owner of the property Paul Lee, the claim was really again stim. He brought a counter-claim for rental arrears in the sum of $2,464.29. That claim was also dismissed.

3. On 8 July 2022, the applicant filed an application for leave to appeal or appeal. The grounds of appeal challenge the findings of fact by the learned adjudicator as to the value of the possessions left behind in the rental property, and the value of the vehicle. The applicant also refers to photos on her old broken phone, now retrieved, showing photographs of her 1999 Nissan 4 x 4 Pathfinder vehicle. This evidence was not available at the hearing and, the applicant submits, goes to the value of the vehicle. This is new evidence.

4. Both parties have filed submissions. Apart from the photographs a review of all of the submissions lead to the conclusion that largely it is a repeat of what was put to the Tribunal to consider at first instance. The applicant’s submission, accepting that she is self-represented, is a series of…