Legal Research
Cases
Marino Law v VC

Marino Law v VC

Case [2021] QCAT 348 27 October 2021

Jurisdiction

Reopening of Proceedings

Final Decision

Notice of Hearing

Cultural and Linguistic Background

Civil Litigation & Procedure

Administrative Law

Type to search within this case.

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Marino Law v VC [2021] QCAT 348

PARTIES: ROBERT JAMES MARINO ATF THE RJM LEGAL INVESTMENT TRUST AND BENJAMIN ANTHONY MARINO ATF THE BAM LEGAL TRUST IN PARTNERSHIP TRADING AS MARINO LAW ABN 88 075 786 040

(applicant)

v

VC

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

MCDO 00129/21

MATTER TYPE:

Other minor civil dispute matters

DELIVERED ON:

27 October 2021

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Southport

DECISION OF:

Adjudicator Alan Walsh

ORDERS AND DIRECTIONS:

1.       The proceedings are reopened.

2.       The Orders dated 19 August 2021 are set aside.

3.       The issues that must be heard and decided again are all the issues in the proceeding.

4.       The issues in the dispute must be heard and decided by way of fresh hearing on the merits.

5.       QCAT Registry relist the matter for final hearing by Adjudicator Alan Walsh on a date after 30 November 2021 on notice by email and mail to the parties.

6.       QCAT Registry arrange for an interpreter of the Russian language to attend the hearing in person.

7.       The Applicants must on or by 4 pm on 3 November 2021 file with the Tribunal and email to the Respondent all file notes and other documents not already disclosed that variously are relevant to the issues in dispute and as will enable the Tribunal to decide the proceeding with all the relevant facts.

8.       The Respondent must on or by 4 pm on 17 November 2021 file with the Tribunal and email to the Applicants any amended Response on which he wishes to rely.

9.       The Applicants and Respondent must on or by 24 November 2021 confer on a without prejudice basis to see if the dispute can be settled and promptly file an Application for consent orders if it is resolved.

10.     QCAT Registry place this file before Adjudicator Alan Walsh for a review on the papers after 24 November 2021.

11.     QCAT Registry email and mail this decision and these reasons and orders to the parties.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS -AMENDING, VARYING AND SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – ACTIONS TO REVIEW OR SET ASIDE JUDGMENT OR ORDER – GENERALLY – where final orders made against Respondent for failure to attend minor civil dispute hearing on 19 August 2021 ostensibly without reasonable excuse – where final orders not made on case merits – where Respondent applied to reopen proceeding – where Applicants did not oppose reopening application - whether reopening ground requires previous decision made on the merits – whether Tribunal may reopen proceeding finally decided for failing to attend without reasonable excuse – whether Respondent established reopening ground – whether proceedings should be reopened

Acts Interpretation Act 1954 (Qld), s 9, s 14A
Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld), s 31
Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld), s 4, s 7, s 18, s 20, s 23, s 26
Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld), s 328.
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Marino Law v VC

Details

AGLC: Marino Law v VC [2021] QCAT 348
Case: [2021] QCAT 348
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Marino Law, a firm of lawyers, made a claim for unpaid legal fees against VC, who was a former client. VC responded by asking for a refund of money he had paid in advance to Marino Law and denying the balance was due. The parties appeared before Adjudicator Alan Walsh who, in the absence of VC, made orders in favour of Marino Law. VC then applied to reopen the proceedings. The Tribunal considered whether it had jurisdiction to do so where the original orders were not made on the merits of the case. The Tribunal held that it did have jurisdiction to reopen the proceedings, and did so. The Tribunal ordered that the matter be heard and determined afresh. The Tribunal also ordered that a Russian interpreter attend the hearing and that the parties file additional documents and confer on a without prejudice basis to see if the matter could be settled.

Orders