Meehan v Harrison

[2019] QCAT 345

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Meehan v Harrison & Anor [2019] QCAT 345

PARTIES:

MICHAEL MEEHAN

(applicant)

v

KAREN HARRISON

(first respondent)

SCOTT HARRISON

(second respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

REO006-15

MATTER TYPE:

Building matters

DELIVERED ON:

14 November 2019

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Howe

ORDERS:

Each party bear their own costs of the application.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COSTS – GENERAL MATTERS – POWER TO AWARD GENERALLY – where long history of litigation between the parties – where judgment given – where omission in calculation of damages – where a party applied to correct the decision – where both parties appealed – where the application to correct the decision withdrawn prior to determination of appeals – where appeal confirmed the error in calculation of damages – where the correction not opposed at appeal – where the other party claimed costs of the application for correction

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 135

Harrison & Anor v Meehan [2018] QCATA 191

Harrison & Anor v Meehan [2019] QCATA 15

REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:	Andrews Law
Respondents:	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

1. The parties have a history of litigation between them arising out of a building dispute. I heard the original building dispute in 2015.[1]

   [1]BDL120-14.

2. Following a two-day hearing on 10 June 2015, I ordered Mr Meehan pay $54,740.68 to Mr and Mrs Harrison.

3. On 6 July 2015 Mr Meehan made the within application (REO006–15) for correction of the decision pursuant to s 135 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld). He filed an amended application on 15 July 2015.

4. The primary relief he sought in the Application for Reopening, Correction, Renewal or Amendment REO006-15 was to amend the balance sum awarded the Harrisons by taking into account in the calculation of damages the unpaid balance of the contract price due to him by Mr and Mrs Harrison under the building contract which was not included in the decision.

5. In the alternative Mr Meehan sought a reopening of the final decision. It is clear however that his primary application was to correct the calculation of the amount to be paid the Harrisons.

6. On 8 July 2015 Mr Meehan applied for an order staying the decision in BDL120–14 pending determination of the application for correction. That application for stay was dismissed by the tribunal however on 9 July 2015.

7. On 8 July 2015 Mr Meehan also applied for an order that any application by either party to appeal BDL 120 – 14 be extended for 28 days from the date of determination of Mr Meehan’s application for correction.

8. The application to extend time was also dismissed by the tribunal on 14 July 2015.

9. In the meantime on 10 July 2015 Mr and Mrs Harrison filed an appeal against the building decision…