Civil and Administrative Tribunal
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Nowacki v S & Q Assets Pty Limited [2022] NSWCATEN 1 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 22 July 2022 Decision date: 22 July 2022 Jurisdiction: Enforcement Before: I R Coleman SC ADCJ, Principal Member Decision: (1) Pursuant to s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) the Tribunal is satisfied that it is appropriate to dispense with a hearing of the referral application.
(2) Pursuant to s 73(5) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) the Application filed 27 October 2021 for contempt be referred to the Supreme Court of New South Wales for determination.
(3) Costs are reserved.
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE- contempt - where respondent in breach of Tribunal orders - whether evidence capable of establishing contempt of Tribunal - whether contempt application should be referred to Supreme Court
Legislation Cited: Local Government Act 1993 (NSW)
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)
Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Mohareb v Palmer 27 NSWCA 281
Burns v Corbett [2015] NSWCATAD 188
Australasian Meat Industry Employees Union v Mudginberri Station Pty Limited [1986] HCA 46; (1986) 161 CLR 98
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Dianne Nowacki (Appellant)
S & Q Assett Pty Ltd (Respondent)Representation: Nil
File Number(s): PC 21/44309 Publication restriction: Nil
REASONS FOR DECISION
Introduction
-
On 27 October 2021 Diane Nowacki and others (Applicants) filed an application seeking orders against S & Q Assets Pty Limited (Respondent) that proceedings for contempt be taken against the Respondent for “wilfully and deliberately disobeying orders made by the Tribunal 27 March 2020 in RC20/02707 and varied by orders made on 4 June 2020 in RC20/18735 and on 16 October 2020 in RC20/29501” or that “these matters be referred to the Supreme Court of New South Wales for determination” (“referral application”).
-
The grounds for the application were pleaded in the following terms:
“On 27 March 2020 in proceedings RC20/02707, the Tribunal made orders directing the Respondent operator of a residential community to carry out work by 20 April 2020. Reasons were given. Order 1 comprised a work order with 5 items, in summary directed to a reasonable arrangement for mail receipt; to curing a danger caused by pipes lying on the ground of common property; to curing a danger caused by roots; to informing the Applicant the basis upon which her electricity was charged; and to informing the Applicant the basis upon which her water was charged. On 4 June 2020 in proceedings RC/18735, the Tribunal extended time for compliance and ordered that if the orders were not complied with by 26 June 2020, then by 31 July 2020, the Applicant owner could request the relisting so that further orders could be considered.”
-
At all material times the Applicants have…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Nowacki v S & Q Assets Pty Limited 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
- [2022] NSWCATEN 1
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the evidence presented by the applicant was sufficient to establish that the respondent was in contempt of the Tribunal. The court was also required to determine whether the contempt application should be referred to the Supreme Court for a determination. The respondent argued that the application should be dismissed as there was no evidence of contempt, and that the matter should not be referred to the Supreme Court.
The court found that the evidence presented by the applicant was sufficient to establish that the respondent had breached the orders of the Tribunal. The court noted that the respondent had been given multiple opportunities to comply with the orders but had failed to do so. The court held that it was appropriate to refer the matter to the Supreme Court for a determination of the contempt application, as the matter involved a question of law and procedure. The court was satisfied that it was appropriate to dispense with a hearing of the referral application and that costs were reserved.
In summary, the court found that the evidence was sufficient to establish that the respondent had breached the orders of the Tribunal and that the contempt application should be referred to the Supreme Court for a determination. The court ordered that the application filed on 27 October 2021 for contempt be referred to the Supreme Court of New South Wales for determination, and that costs were reserved.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) Pursuant to s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) the Tribunal is satisfied that it is appropriate to dispense with a hearing of the referral application.
(2) Pursuant to s 73(5) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) the Application filed 27 October 2021 for contempt be referred to the Supreme Court of New South Wales for determination.
(3) Costs are reserved.
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.