Lisa-Marie West v Phillip John Campbell

[2025] QCATA 23

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Lisa-Marie West v Phillip John Campbell [2025] QCATA 23

PARTIES:

Lisa-Marie West
(applicant)

v

Phillip John Campbell

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO:

APL071-24

MATTER TYPE:

Appeal

DELIVERED ON:

4 March 2025

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Judicial Member WA Isdale

ORDER/S:

1.   Leave to appeal is refused

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – where the applicant seeks leave to appeal

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)

Pickering v McArthur [2005] QCA 294

APPEARANCES:

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

Reasons and Decision

Background

1. On 18 December, 2023, Mr Campbell filed a claim in this Tribunal. The claim is characterised as one relating to a minor civil dispute or minor debt. The description of the matter as “minor” relates to the sum of money in issue and does not reflect in any way the seriousness with which it might be viewed by the parties or the attention which it is given by the Tribunal.

2. It is not necessary for present purposes to discuss the details of the claim. It is sufficient to note that it was for a total of $3,282.09.

3. The matter was dealt with by way of a default decision on 8 February 2024 as the Tribunal did not receive any response by Ms West after the application by Mr Campbell was served on her

4. This was a regular process and pursuant to it the Tribunal ordered that Ms West pay $3,282.09 to Mr Campbell. Ms West had not taken the opportunity to dispute that such an order should be made.

5. By application filed on 11 March, 2024 Ms West seeks to have leave to appeal this decision. This Tribunal has already considered an application to stay the decision sought to be appealed from and on 4 April, 2024 refused that application.

The present application

1. Section 142(3)(a)(i) of the QCAT Act requires that in cases such as this, leave to appeal must be obtained. It is usual that such leave would be granted where it appears that there is a reasonable argument that an error was made such that an appeal would be required to correct a substantial injustice to the applicant that was caused by the error.[1]

   [1]Pickering v McArthur [2005] QCA 294 [3].

2. On 13 March, 2024, the Tribunal made Orders in this matter. Among these orders was the following:

   ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE

   8.(a)  If either party seeks leave to rely upon evidence or a document that was not before the Tribunal below ('additional evidence'), they shall file in the Tribunal one (1) copy and serve on the other party one (1) copy of an application for leave to rely upon additional evidence, together with a copy of the additional evidence. The application shall include submissions about:

   i.why the additional evidence was not available to the Tribunal below;

   i.why the additional evidence is important; and

   ii.why the additional evidence should be accepted.

   (b) If an application for leave to rely upon additional evidence is filed, the other party may file and serve written submissions in response within 21 days of the date the application for leave to rely upon additional evidence is filed.

   (c) Unless otherwise ordered, any application for leave to rely upon additional evidence will be heard and determined together with the application for leave to appeal or appeal.

   9.Unless either party files an application for an oral hearing by 4:00pm on 29 May 2024, the application for leave to appeal and the appeal (if the application for leave to appeal is granted) will be heard and determined on the papers.

3. It is pursuant to Order 9 that the matter is now before the Tribunal for determination on the papers.

4. Ms West has lodged with the Tribunal on 27 May, 2024 her affidavit dated 22 May, 2024. Also lodged on the same date are statements from Ms Mandy Evans, Ms Bonita Hening and Mr Michael Matz.

5. Also received by the Tribunal are an affidavit by Mr Campbell filed on 14 May, 2024. It is dated 7 May 2024. Received on the same dated was a statement from Ms Lara Hall dated 6 May, 2024.

6. On 22 April, 2024, Ms West provided the Tribunal with her affidavit dated 17 April. It includes the following:

   I got served on Christmas Eve while I was at work documents saying he wanted me to pay him $3,200 it was a shock but because I had never had it happen I didn't know how to response [sic] or what needed to be done, I though maybe I'd get contacted by QCAT with directions or a call or something but I didn't receive anything until I got the default decision, a decision had already been made that I had to pay Philip Campbell $3,200. No mediation process nothing, Philip then emailed me saying I had a deadline to response to him and if I didn't, he would issue an enforcement order on me to retrieve his money. In my understanding I had 28 days to submit an application to Stay and an application to appeal, but before I got a chance Philip had sent me the enforcement documentation telling me I had 14 days to get the paperwork back to him or he will go to the next phase. I was advised by Local police to not fill out the paperwork unless it was done by a professional enforcer and was advised not to have anymore correspondence with Philip. The way Philip has gone about this Civil Court order and his actions after I received the paperwork has been nothing more than an intimidation tactic. Local police have also become concerned for mine and my children's safety when it comes to Philip Campbell doing welfare checks to make sure we are safe.

   I don't understand the process for the appeal and what I need to include to defend myself as I don't have the legal background intelligence Philip has, but I will not be victimised any longer and be made to feel like I owe someone I thought loved me, money I don't have due to me leaving him. I am willing to provide my evidence and any other further information the tribunal may require for final decision.

7. This is informative of the circumstances from the perspective of Ms West.

Resolution of the matter

1. The Tribunal Orders of 13 March, 2024, are applicable in resolving this matter. Order 8(a) has not been complied with in that there is no application for leave to rely on additional evidence and, importantly, Order 8(a)(i), (ii) and (iii) have not been complied with. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal must be dealt with without the Tribunal being able to have recourse to the additional material which was lodged.

2. It is not able to be simply put aside that the required application referred to in Order 8(a) was not made. Order 8(a)(i) is designed to obtain information of great relevance to the Tribunal’s decision concerning the application to grant leave to appeal and all of the aspects of Order 8 are of major importance in placing the Tribunal in a position to do justice in the matter.

3. In the circumstances, the Tribunal is not able to be satisfied that an appeal would be necessary in order to correct a substantial injustice to Ms West so leave to appeal must be, and is, refused.

Orders:

1.            Leave to appeal is refused.