David Hambleton as joint and several Liquidator of Sky 5 Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v The Chief Executive, Office of Fair Trading Department of Justice and Attorney General - [2014] QCAT 511

CITATION:

David Hambleton as joint and several Liquidator of Sky 5 Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v The Chief Executive, Office of Fair Trading Department of Justice and Attorney General & Anor [2014] QCAT 511

PARTIES:	David Hambleton as joint and several Liquidator of Sky 5 Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (Applicant)
v
The Chief Executive, Office of Fair Trading Department of Justice and Attorney General Stanley Gordon Tuxford (Respondents)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

GAR243-13

MATTER TYPE:

General administrative review matters

HEARING DATE:

On the Papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Paratz

DELIVERED ON:

15 October 2014

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1. The Applicant must file one (1) copy in the Tribunal and give one (1) copy to the Respondents of any further and final submissions and any further material on which the Applicant intends to rely in relation to the application for extension of time filed on 13 June 2013, by: 4:00pm on 7 November 2014.

2. The Respondents must file one (1) copy in the Tribunal and give one (1) copy to the Applicant of any further and final submissions and any further material on which the Respondents intend to rely in relation to the application for extension of time filed on 13 June 2013, by: 4:00pm on 28 November 2014.

3. No party may file any further material other than as provided for in these Directions.

4. The application for extension of time filed on 13 June 2013 is to be set for a one day hearing for the making of oral submissions, but without any oral evidence, at a date to be set at Directions Hearing held for the purpose.

5. The Applicant and the Respondents are both granted leave to attend the Directions Hearing by telephone.

6. The Application is listed for a Directions Hearing in Brisbane at 1:30pm on 12 December 2014 for the purpose of setting a hearing date.

CATCHWORDS:

APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME – PAMDA – where the Applicant sought an oral hearing of an application for extension of time – where a large claim and difficult matter – where an oral hearing for submissions only was directed – where a claim upon the fund cannot be considered until it is processed in accordance with the Act

Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 (Qld), s 473, s 474, s 475, s 476

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

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

REASONS FOR DECISION

David Hambleton as joint and several Liquidator of Sky 5 Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (‘Hambleton’) lodged claims against the claim fund established under the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 (Qld) (the Act) in PAMD Form 50 on 8 April 2013.
The claims were out of time as they were lodged more than one year after the purchasers became aware of their losses on 23 May 2008, and more than three years after the events that…

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 David Hambleton as joint and several Liquidator of Sky 5 Pty...

Details

AGLC: David Hambleton as joint and several Liquidator of Sky 5 Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v The Chief Executive, Office of Fair Trading Department of Justice and Attorney General [2014] QCAT 511
Case: [2014] QCAT 511
Decision Date: 15 October 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

David Hambleton, acting as the joint and several liquidator of Sky 5 Pty Ltd (in liquidation), filed an application for an extension of time in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal against the Chief Executive of the Office of Fair Trading, Department of Justice and Attorney General. The matter involved a complex dispute concerning the processing of a claim against a fund established under the Property Settlement (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1996. The liquidator sought an extension of time to allow for the presentation of further arguments and materials in support of this application, which was initially filed on 13 June 2013. The Chief Executive opposed the application for an extension of time, arguing that the matter was already complicated and that an oral hearing would not be necessary.

The primary legal issue before the tribunal was whether an oral hearing was required to consider the application for an extension of time, given the complexity of the matter and the nature of the claims involved. The tribunal had to balance the need for procedural fairness with the practicalities of managing a potentially lengthy and intricate case. Another issue was whether the claim could be processed in accordance with the Property Settlement (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1996, which governed the fund from which the liquidator sought compensation.

The tribunal directed that the application for an extension of time would be heard in a streamlined manner, allowing for oral submissions but not evidence, to manage the case effectively. The tribunal emphasised that a claim upon the fund could not be considered until it was processed in accordance with the Act. The tribunal also imposed strict deadlines for the submission of final written arguments and materials by both parties. To facilitate the efficient progression of the case, the tribunal scheduled a directions hearing to set a specific date for the one-day hearing of the application for an extension of time. Both parties were granted leave to attend the directions hearing by telephone.

In conclusion, the tribunal issued directions that required both the applicant and the respondents to file their final submissions and materials by specified deadlines, and it scheduled a directions hearing to set a date for the one-day hearing of the application for an extension of time. The tribunal aimed to ensure that the case was managed efficiently while providing an opportunity for both parties to present their arguments in a fair and orderly manner.

Orders

Orders of the court

3. No party may file any further material other than as provided for in these Directions.

5. The Applicant and the Respondents are both granted leave to attend the Directions Hearing by telephone.

6. The Application is listed for a Directions Hearing in Brisbane at 1:30pm on 12 December 2014 for the purpose of setting a hearing date.

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.