Jindal v Michael Kenneth Eagles

[2023] QCAT 119

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Jindal & Anor v Michael Kenneth Eagles & Ors [2023] QCAT 119

PARTIES:

AMIT JINDAL
(FIRST APPLICANT)
AND
JYOTI BHATIA

(second applicants)

v

MICHAEL KENNETH EAGLES
(FIRST RESPONDENT)
AND
PAUL EAGLES
(SECOND RESPONDENT)
AND
PRE INVESTMENTS PTY LTD
(THIRD RESPONDENT)
AND
JENNY EAGLES

(fourth respondents)

APPLICATION NO/S:

BDL242-21

MATTER TYPE:

Building matters

DELIVERED ON:

5 April 2023

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Senior Member Brown

ORDERS:

1.     The parties must file in the Tribunal two (2) copies and exchange one (1) copy of the orders proposed by the parties to give effect to these reasons by 4:00pm on 19 April 2023.

2.     The Tribunal will make further orders after 19 April 2023.

CATCHWORDS:

STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS: JURISDICTION, POWERS AND GENERALLY – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – ENDING PROCEEDINGS EARLY – SUMMARY DISPOSAL – SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT OR RESPONDENT: STAY OR DISMISSAL OF PROCEEDINGS – where first, second and fourth respondents sought to be removed as parties to the proceeding – whether claim by applicants against first, second and fourth respondents a ‘building dispute’ – whether QCAT has jurisdiction – whether the part of the proceeding against the first, second and fourth respondents should be dismissed

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 42(2), s 47(1), s 47(2)

Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld), s 77(1), s 77(2)

Paddy v Bennett [2022] QCAT 382

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. The applicants entered into a contract with the first respondent to build a new dwelling.

2. The applicants say that the work undertaken by the first respondent is defective. They have commenced these proceedings claiming, among other things, damages for the cost of rectification work.

3. The second, third and fourth respondents (the respondents) have applied to be removed from the proceeding.

4. The applicants oppose the application.

   Relevant statutory provisions – Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009 (Qld)

5. The respondents apply to be removed from the proceeding relying upon the power conferred by s 42(2) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009 (Qld) (‘QCAT Act’) which provides:

   (2)The tribunal may order that a party be removed from a proceeding if the tribunal considers that—

   (a)the party’s interests are not, or are no longer, affected by the proceeding; or

   (b)the party is not a proper or necessary party to the proceeding, whether or not the party was one originally.

6. The respondents also rely upon s 47(2) of the QCAT Act. Sections 47(1) and 47(2) provide:

   (1)This section applies if the tribunal considers a proceeding or a part of a proceeding is—

   (a)       frivolous, vexatious or misconceived; or

   (b)       lacking in substance; or

   (c)       otherwise an abuse of process.

   (2)The tribunal may—

   (a)if the party who brought the proceeding or part before the tribunal is the applicant for the…