Lida Build Pty Ltd v Miller

[2010] QCAT 155

CITATION:  Lida Build Pty Ltd v Miller [2010] QCAT 155

PARTIES:   Lida Build Pty Ltd

v

Peter & Susan Miller

APPLICATION NUMBER:            BD314-09     

MATTER TYPE:   Building matters

HEARING DATE:   28 January 2010

HEARD AT:   Decision on the papers

DECISION OF:   Peta Stilgoe

DELIVERED ON:   28 January 2010

DELIVERED AT:   Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:   Application for leave for legal representation refused

CATCHWORDS:  application for legal representation

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

Decision on the papers

REASONS FOR DECISION

[1]Section 43(1) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (the Act) provides that the main purpose is to have parties represent themselves unless the interests of justice require otherwise.

[2]Parties are expected to represent themselves in proceedings before the Tribunal except in those cases where representation is permitted as of right.  In cases where leave is needed for parties to be represented, the Tribunal must be satisfied that the interests of justice require the parties to be represented.      

[3]The applicant requests legal representation on the basis that the matters before the tribunal are complex legal issues, that legal representation will assist the tribunal and that the applicant has no experience in court or tribunal proceedings.

[4]The respondent objects to the applicant having legal representation because it will provide an unfair advantage to the applicant, the respondents have proceeded on the basis that no legal representation was permitted or required and any legal representation will not be able to submit further evidence.

[5]Under section 28 of the Act the tribunal must act fairly, must act in accordance with the substantial merits of the case, must observe the rules of natural justice, must act with as little formality and technicality as proper consideration of the issues permit and must ensure that all relevant material is disclosed as far as is practicable.   

[6]Through its own processes and Rules, the tribunal has from its commencement set in place arrangements that should result in parties to a proceeding being accorded procedural fairness and in matters being dealt with in a way that is accessible, fair, just, economical, informal and quick. 

[7]The tribunal does not consider that the presence of a legal representative in a proceeding will necessarily promote procedural fairness or will necessarily assist the tribunal to a material degree to achieve its statutory objects, particularly in a case where the other party is not legally represented.  The tribunal has not been persuaded that granting leave to the applicant to be legally represented in the proceedings will advance the interests of justice as contemplated by the Act.

[8]From a reading of the decision and of the documentation provided by the applicant, the tribunal has been unable to ascertain any such complex question that would necessitate input from a legal representative.

[9]The tribunal does not accept the submissions of the applicant that representations by a legal representative will best ensure that the proceedings are run with the appropriate expertise to assist the tribunal to resolve the matter.