Nowacki v S & Q Assets Pty Limited

Link copied
Case Copied 18 min read

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:

DVI v ZTT [2021] NSWCATEN 4

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

Witham v Holloway [1995] HCA 3; (1995) 183 CLR 525

National Australia Bank Limited v Juric [2001] VSC 375

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

  1. 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”).

  2. 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.”

  1. At all material times the Applicants have…

CaseChat AU logo

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
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2022] NSWCATEN 1
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter of Nowacki v S & Q Assets Pty Limited concerned the respondent's alleged breach of orders made by the Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The dispute was referred to the Supreme Court of New South Wales for a decision on whether the evidence was sufficient to establish contempt of the Tribunal. The respondent had been ordered to pay a sum of money to the applicant, but allegedly failed to do so. The Tribunal found that the evidence provided by the applicant was sufficient to establish contempt, and therefore referred the matter to the Supreme Court for a determination of the issue.

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.