Harris v Cronk (No 2)

[2012] QCAT 337

CITATION: Harris v Cronk and Anor (No 2) [2012] QCAT 337

PARTIES:	Brian Glen Harris (Applicant/Appellant)
v
Malcolm Cronk Sarah Jane Cronk (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER: BD422-08

MATTER TYPE: Building matters

HEARING DATE: On the papers

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Richard Oliver, Senior Member

DELIVERED ON: 31 July 2012

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE: Request to amend under s 135 of the QCAT Act is refused.

CATCHWORDS:

Mistake – request to amend

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, s 135

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

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

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. On 14 May 2012 I delivered reasons in this matter.  The Tribunal’s order was that the respondents pay to the applicant $1,941.00.

1. The respondents’ representative has written to the Tribunal requesting that the reasons be amended under s 135 of the QCAT Act because they believe there has been a mathematical error in that I did not include, as part of their counterclaim, $1,760.00 for liquidated damages. The applicant conceded that if liquidated damages were payable the sum should be that amount.

1. Rather than allow the liquidated damages I adopted the submissions of the respondents that the true loss was loss of rental payments and interest which amounted to $22,790.00, a sum far in excess of that contended for by the respondent.  To also award the liquidated damages would, in my view, be a “double dip” and therefore I do not propose to change the decision.

1. The parties agreed that the case on rectification would be by reference to the joint experts report. The decision was made having regard to that report. To now seek to include additional claim of $700 not included in the joint expert report does not fall within s 135. No further allowance will be made.

1. The year in paragraph 71 will be amended to 2009.

1. The request to amend the reasons and the decision under s 135 is refused.