Hartley v Di Russo

In the case of Hartley v Di Russo, the appellant, Mr Hartley, sought an appeal against a decision made by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). The underlying dispute was a building dispute which Mr Hartley had commenced in QCAT. The tribunal had dismissed his application for lack of jurisdiction, finding that he had not complied with the process established by the Queensland Building and Construction Commission to attempt to resolve the dispute before proceeding to QCAT. Mr Di Russo, the respondent, defended the tribunal's decision. The central legal issue before the court was whether QCAT had the power to waive compliance with the substantive provision of the enabling Act that required a dispute to be attempted to be resolved before the Commission prior to being brought to QCAT.

The court examined the relevant statutory provisions and found that the requirement to attempt to resolve a dispute before the Commission was indeed substantive and could not be waived by QCAT. The court held that the tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to hear and decide the proceeding because Mr Hartley had not complied with the mandatory process set out in the enabling Act. The court emphasised the importance of following the established procedures to ensure fairness and consistency in the resolution of building disputes.

The appeal was allowed, the decision of 23 June 2017 was set aside, and the application was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The court's decision reinforced the principle that tribunals cannot ignore mandatory procedural requirements set out in the enabling Act and must adhere to the established process for resolving disputes. The outcome of the case serves as a reminder for parties to follow the prescribed procedures to avoid their applications being dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.