Oberdorf v Prima Apartments

Case

[2010] QCATA 121

24 December 2010


CITATION: Oberdorf v Prima Apartments [2010] QCATA 121
PARTIES: Jacqueline Oberdorf
v
Prima Apartments

APPLICATION NUMBER:            APL213-10               

MATTER TYPE:

HEARING DATE:   On the papers

HEARD AT:   Brisbane

DECISION OF: Richard Oliver, Senior Member

DELIVERED ON:   24 December 2010

DELIVERED AT:   Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:       Leave to appeal refused    

CATCHWORDS : 

Residential Tenancy matter; no error of law or fact

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 section 142(3).

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

This matter was heard on the papers, pursuant to section 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

  1. On 23 August 2010 the Tribunal made orders terminating a tenancy agreement between Ms Oberdorf and the respondent in respect of premises at Unit 72, 280 Grand Avenue Forest Lake. A warrant issued and Ms Oberdorf was ordered to pay arrears of rent in the sum of $7,202.86.

  1. On 16 September 2010 Ms Oberdorf filed an Application for leave to appeal or appeal in QCAT. Leave is necessary: QCAT Act section 142(3). The Tribunal then, on 27 September 2010, issued Directions for the filing of material and submissions in support of the application. Ms Oberdorf did not comply with these directions.

  1. Further Directions were issued on 13 December 2010 giving Ms Oberdorf a further opportunity to file submissions in support of her application and again she did not comply.

  1. Further submissions are necessary because the grounds for leave to appeal set out in the application do not identify any error of law or fact on the part of the learned Adjudicator who made the orders on 23 August 2010.

  1. What the applicant wants is for the Tribunal to make an order giving her time to pay off the debt of $7,202.86 which obviously does not constitute an error of law or fact.

  1. The Directions made on 13 December informed the applicant that if submissions were not filed then the application would be determined without a hearing.

  1. Having read the transcript of evidence and considered the material filed in the appeal, no error is demonstrated by the applicant and none is apparent therefore leave to appeal is refused.

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0