Goldsmith v AMP Life Ltd

[2016] QCATA 162

CITATION: Goldsmith & Anor v AMP Life Ltd [2016] QCATA 162

PARTIES:	Andrew David Goldsmith Janne Elizabeth Tippett (Applicants/Appellants)
v AMP Life Ltd ACN 001777591
(Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER:		APL430-15

MATTER TYPE: Appeals

HEARING DATE: 9 June 2016

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Justice Carmody

DELIVERED ON: 18 October 2016

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

IT IS THE DECISION OF THE APPEAL TRIBUNAL THAT:

1.     The application for leave to appeal is refused.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – AMENDING, VARYING AND SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – VARIATION AND SETTING ASIDE OF CONSENT JUDGMENT OR ORDER – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – where the applicants filed compensation claim against the respondents in the tribunal – where the respondents made a counter-application – where the compensation claim was stayed when the company appointed liquidators – where the liquidators indicated they did not “presently intend” to take any step to continue the application – where the rights “to take action” were later assigned by the liquidators to the applicants – whether the application was stayed indefinitely – whether the assignment was improper or ineffective – where the tribunal made a consent order in the belief that both parties had validly consented to the discontinuation application – where the applicants claim they were unaware that their application had been administratively terminated – whether the consent order was invalid because the applicants were entitled to be but were not notified of it – whether the applicants were entitled to be notified – whether the consent order was invalid because it was not in terms sought – whether the consent order can and should be aside

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – AMENDING, VARYING AND SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – ACTIONS TO REVIEW OR SET ASIDE JUDGMENT OR ORDER – WHERE JUDGMENT OR ORDER MADE IRREGULARLY, ILLEGALLY OR AGAINST GOOD FAITH – whether the consent order is invalid because the respondents misled the tribunal into making it – where the respondent knowingly initiated and filed the discontinuation application for a consent order without the applicants’ consent – whether the consent order should be set aside for fraud

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL - GENERAL PRINCIPLES – RIGHT OF APPEAL – WHEN APPEAL LIES – ERROR OF LAW – WHAT IS – where the applicants applied to reopening a proceeding – where the reopening application was transferred administratively to the appeals list – whether the applicants have shown a better than arguable case of error – whether the loss of a right to defend a counter-application amounts to substantial injustice – whether the appeal tribunal should exercise its discretion to waiver time limits on the claim

Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) s 60(2)

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 477(2), 500(2)

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) ss 25, 26, 27, 28, 37, 38, 39, 42, 45, 46, 57A, 59, 126, 127, 133, 135, 139, 141, 143, 146, Sch…