QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CITATION:
McGrath Estate Agents v Korattiparambil & Anor [2020] QCATA 68
PARTIES: MCGRATH ESTATE AGENTS (applicant/appellant)
v
AFDAL KORATTIPARAMBIL (first respondent)
ASHNY ALI
(second respondent)
APPLICATION NO/S:
APL176-19
ORIGINATING APPLICATION NO/S:
MCDT2696-18 Brisbane
MATTER TYPE:
Appeals
DELIVERED ON:
8 May 2020
HEARING DATE:
On the papers
HEARD AT:
Brisbane
DECISION OF:
Member Howe
ORDERS: 1. Leave to Appeal granted.
2. Appeal allowed.
3. The decision made 13 June 2019 is set aside.
4. The respondents pay the appellant the sum of $603.80 within 14 days of order.
CATCHWORDS: APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – RIGHT OF APPEAL – where the appellant had brought residential tenancy dispute proceedings against the respondent tenants claiming minor compensation – where Justices of the Peace allowed the respondent tenants compensation without a counter application or other application being filed – where the claims were for loss amenity – where the tenancy had ended and no loss of amenity claims were available to the respondents – where leave to appeal granted – where appeal allowed
Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 (Qld) s 94, s 419(3), s 420
Bourke v Kenjad Rentals [2019] QCATA 81
Gould v Mazheiko & Gill [2020] QCATA 10
Pickering v McArthur [2005] QCA 294
REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:
Self-represented
Respondent:
Self-represented
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 FOR DECISION
The applicant, McGrath Estate Agents (‘the Agents’), acting for a lessor at Coorparoo, commenced minor civil dispute – residential tenancy proceedings against the respondent tenants claiming the costs of replacing a kitchen rangehood and some tiles on a balcony from the bond.
The respondents had commenced the tenancy on 8 July 2017 and vacated on 2 November 2018.
At a hearing before Justices of the Peace on 13 June 2019 the tenants raised complaints about defective air-conditioning in the house for a significant period from start of the tenancy and loss of amenity caused the tenants by renovations done to another unit on the floor above them.
The Justices of the Peace awarded the Agents the claims for cost of replacement of the rangehood and the cost of replacing 7 tiles on the balcony in an amount of $603.80 but also allowed the tenants an amount of $1,260 loss of amenity for the faulty air-conditioners and $420 loss of amenity caused by the renovations for 6 weeks. In end result the Agents were ordered to pay the tenants $1,076.20 and the bond of $1400 was ordered to be refunded to the tenants.
The Agents seek leave to appeal that decision.
Given this is an appeal from a decision made in the Tribunal’s minor civil dispute jurisdiction, leave to appeal must first be obtained before any appeal proceeds.[1]
[1]Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 142(3)(a)(i)
Leave to appeal will usually only be granted where an appeal is necessary to correct a substantial…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read McGrath Estate Agents v Korattiparambil and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2020] QCATA 68
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues in the appeal were whether the Local Court had the jurisdiction to grant the respondents compensation without a counter application or other application being filed, and whether the respondents were entitled to loss of amenity compensation after the tenancy had ended. The appellant argued that the Local Court did not have jurisdiction to grant the respondents compensation without a counter application or other application being filed, and that the respondents were not entitled to loss of amenity compensation as the tenancy had ended. The respondents contended that the Local Court did have jurisdiction and that they were entitled to compensation.
The appeal was allowed by the court. The court found that the Local Court did not have jurisdiction to grant the respondents compensation without a counter application or other application being filed, and that the respondents were not entitled to loss of amenity compensation after the tenancy had ended. The court held that the appellant was entitled to be compensated for the loss of amenity, and that the respondents were not entitled to compensation. The decision made on 13 June 2019 was set aside, and the respondents were ordered to pay the appellant the sum of $603.80 within 14 days of the order. The court also granted leave to appeal to the appellant.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Leave to Appeal granted.
2. Appeal allowed.
3. The decision made 13 June 2019 is set aside.
4. The respondents pay the appellant the sum of $603.80 within 14 days of order.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.