Manwin v Board of Professional Engineers

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Manwin v Board of Professional Engineers [2010] QCA 130

PARTIES:

ATANAS VASS MANWIN
(applicant)
v
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No 13452 of 2009
DC No 254 of 2009

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Leave s 118 DCA (Civil)

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

28 May 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

17 May 2010

JUDGES:

McMurdo P and Muir and White JJA
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

The application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – WHEN APPEAL LIES – BY LEAVE OF THE COURT – GENERALLY – applicant a registered professional engineer – applicant found to have engaged in unsatisfactory professional conduct – applicant’s arguments considered by the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal and twice by the District Court – applicant’s grounds of application challenged factual findings – principles to apply when determining applications for leave to appeal – whether there was an error of law on the part of the primary judge – whether application for leave to appeal should be granted

Commercial and Consumer Tribunal Act 2003 (Qld) (Repealed)
District Court of Queensland Act 1967 (Qld), s 118(3)

Manwin v Board of Professional Engineers of Queensland [2009] QDC 328, discussed
Rodgers v Smith[2006] QCA 353, cited

COUNSEL:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
M F Johnston for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
Holding Redlich for the respondent

1.   McMURDO P:This application for leave to appeal should be refused with costs for the reasons given by Muir JA.

1. MUIR JA: The applicant, a registered professional engineer, was found by the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal on 6 December 2007 to have engaged in unsatisfactory professional conduct within the meaning of Schedule 2 of the Professional Engineers Act 2002 (Qld). He applied to the District Court for leave to appeal from the decision under s 100 of the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal Act 2003 (Qld).[1]

   [1]The Act was repealed by Act No 23 of 2009, s 243.

1. On 29 August 2008, McGill SC DCJ, granted the leave to appeal, ordered that the Tribunal's order be set aside and that the proceeding be remitted to the Tribunal for rehearing by a different Member.  McGill SC DCJ found that the Tribunal Member had erred in not appropriately addressing the question of whether the facts found by the Tribunal Member involved unsatisfactory professional conduct on the part of the applicant.  He held also that the Tribunal Member erred in law in making a finding of fraud in the absence of an allegation of fraud by the respondent Board.

1. The matter was reheard by another Tribunal Member on 18 and 20 November 2008. He gave extensive and careful reasons and held that grounds existed for taking disciplinary action against the applicant. He ordered that: the…