Nadalini v RJW Developments Pty Ltd

CITATION: Nadalini v RJW Developments Pty Ltd [2013] QCATA 023

PARTIES:	Daniel Nadalini (Applicant/Appellant)
v
RJW Developments Pty Ltd (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:   APL091-12

MATTER TYPE: Appeals

HEARING DATE: On the papers

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Richard Oliver, Senior Member
Susan Gardiner, Member

DELIVERED ON: 7 February 2013

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:     

1.    The application for leave to appeal is granted.

2.    The decision is set aside.

3.    Daniel Nadalini pay to RJW Developments Pty Ltd the sum of $282.00 within 14 days.

CATCHWORDS : 

Minor Civil Dispute – where contract for the importation of a boat - where claims and counter-claims for monies owing – where an assessment of competing claims was made on the evidence presented before, during and after the hearing – where procedural fairness given – where decision a matter of fact on the evidence – where sufficient reasons given in calculation of monies owing for Appeal Tribunal to substitute its own decision

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009, ss 32, 137, 138, 142(3) and 146

Clarke v Japan Machines (Australia) Pty Ltd [1984] 1 Qd R 404
Creek v Raine & Horne Real Estate Mossman [2011] QCATA 226

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009 (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

Senior Member Richard Oliver

1. I have had the benefit of reading the reasons of Ms Gardiner in draft. I agree with her reasons and her conclusions, and the order she proposes.

Member Susan Gardiner

1. Daniel Nadalini and RJW Developments entered into an agreement for the purchase of a motor vessel to be shipped from the USA. The purchase process involved also purchasing a trailer to transport the boat to Australia.

2. A dispute arose between the parties about payment under the original agreement and collateral agreements and Daniel Nadalini brought an action in QCAT’s minor civil jurisdiction heard at the Southport Magistrates Court on 11 January 2012 for monies he alleged were owing from the transaction. RJW Developments counterclaimed. 

3. After a very long hearing - some two and a quarter hours, the learned Adjudicator reserved her decision in a very complicated factual matter.

4. The decision was handed down on 28 February 2012 and Mr Nadalini was ordered to pay RJW Developments $8,515.23. His own application was dismissed.

5. Mr Nadalini appeals this decision.

6. Under the QCAT Act, an appeal in the minor civil dispute jurisdiction can only be brought with the Tribunal’s leave or permission.[1] The question whether or not leave should be granted is usually addressed according to established principles: Is there a reasonably arguable case of error in the primary decision?[2] Is there a reasonable prospect that the applicant will obtain substantive relief?[3] Is leave necessary to correct a substantial injustice to the applicant caused by some error?[4] Is there a question of general importance upon which further argument, and a decision of the appellate court or tribunal, would be to the public…