Martin v Gosdchan

[2011] QCATA 71

CITATION: Martin v Gosdchan [2011] QCATA 071

PARTIES:	Bradley Martin (Applicant/Appellant)
v
Petra Gosdschan (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:   APL251-10

MATTER TYPE: Appeals

HEARING DATE: On the papers

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Justice Alan Wilson, President

DELIVERED ON: 28 March 2011

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:     

1.   Both parties are granted leave to be legally represented before the Appeal Tribunal.

2.   The applicant’s application for an extension of time to file his application for leave to appeal (and his appeal if leave is granted) is granted.

3.   The time for filing of the applicant’s application for leave to appeal is extended to the date upon which his application to appeal was filed in October 2010.

4.   The application for leave to appeal (and the appeal if leave is granted) will be determined on the papers.

5.   The applicant will file one copy and give one copy of all of his submissions in support of his application for leave to appeal (and his appeal if leave is granted) to the respondent’s legal representative by 4:00pm on 11 April 2011.

6.   The respondent will file and give the applicant’s legal representative a copy of her submissions in response by 4:00 pm on 25 April 2011.

CATCHWORDS : 

APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL – LEAVE TO BE REPRESENTED – where the respondent was legally represented at first instance – where the applicant seeks leave to be represented at the appeal – where the respondent has not sought leave to be legally represented at the appeal – where the parties submit that the matter involves complex questions of law and fact – whether it is in the interests of justice for the parties to be represented

APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL – EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING SUBMISSIONS – where the applicant’s appeal material was filed either one or three days out of time or, if not, within time having regard to the ‘relevant day’ for filing – whether it is fair and just for an extension of time to be granted 

APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL – PROCEDURE – STRIKING OUT PROCEEDINGS – where the respondent alleges that the proceedings should be struck out as the applicant did not seek leave to appeal, as is required by the legislation – whether the application to strike out is misconceived

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, ss 3, 28, 32, 43, 45, 61, 142

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

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

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. The proceedings before the Appeal Tribunal arise out of Mr Martin’s application for leave to appeal a decision of a QCAT Adjudicator in a building matter, after a hearing in July 2010.  In the original proceedings Mr Martin claimed $12,000 for the value of building work he had allegedly performed for Ms Gosdschan.  She counterclaimed for money she alleged was overpaid to Mr Martin.

2. After a lengthy hearing the…