Quach v GLC Partners Pty Ltd
[2025] QCATA 94
•22 October 2025
QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CITATION:
Quach v GLC Partners Pty Ltd [2025] QCATA 94
PARTIES:
MICHAEL VAN THANH QUACH (applicant/appellant)
v
GLC PARTNERS PTY LTD (respondent)
APPLICATION NO:
APL222-25
ORIGINATING APPLICATION NO:
Q2074-25
MATTER TYPE:
Appeals
DELIVERED ON:
22 October 2025
HEARING DATE:
On the papers
HEARD AT:
Brisbane
DECISION OF:
Member Scott-Mackenzie
ORDERS:
Extension of time application
1. The application by the Michael Van Thanh Quach filed 2 July 2025 is dismissed on the ground an extension of time to file in the Registry the application for leave to appeal and appeal is not required.
Application for leave to appeal and appeal
2. Michael Van Thanh Quach file in the Tribunal two copies and give to the GLC Partners Pty Ltd by email one copy of any submissions on the application for leave to appeal and appeal, by:
4:00pm on 12 November 2025
3. GLC Partners Pty Ltd file in the Tribunal two copies and give to Michael Van Thanh Quach by email one copy of any submissions in reply to Michael Van Thanh Quach’s submissions, by:
4:00pm on 26 November 2025
4. Michael Van Thanh Quach file in the Tribunal two copies and give to GLC Partners Pty Ltd by email one copy of any submissions in reply to the submissions of GLC Partners Pty Ltd, by:
4:00pm on 10 December 2025
5. Unless the Tribunal otherwise directs or orders, the application for leave to appeal and appeal be conducted entirely on the basis of the documents, without the parties, their representatives or witnesses appearing at a hearing under section 32(2) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009 (Qld) (on the papers), after:
10 December 2025
Service of directions and orders
6. These directions and orders be served on the parties by email.
CATCHWORDS:
MINOR CIVIL DISPUTE – APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL AND APPEAL – application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal and appeal – request for reasons for decision – application for leave to appeal and appeal filed before reasons for decision handed down – extension of time unnecessary
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 61, s 142, s 143
REASONS FOR DECISION
The applicant (‘Dr Quach’) has filed an application for leave to appeal or appeal (‘appeal application’). Also, he has filed an application to extend or shorten a time limit or for waiver of compliance with procedural requirements (‘extension of time application’). The latter application is now before the Appeal Tribunal for decision.
Application for leave to appeal or appeal
The appeal application alleges a denial of the natural justice. It is particularised in the following terms:
i GLC Partners Pty Ltd is a trader
ii section 109 of the Australian Constitution, the definition of trader under the Constitution and Australian Consumer Laws prevail over an inconsistency between state laws.
The relief sought is:
(a)a declaration that the signed offer is invalid; and
(b)a new REIQ contract of sale for 72 Crosby Road, Albion typed up and populated to be executed.
Dr Quach, in his extension of time application, applies for an extension of the time to file in the Tribunal the appeal application to 5 June 2025. He later repeats what he says in the submissions accompanying the appeal application. It reads:
On the 20 March 2025, I called QCAT regarding lodging an appeal. I was told that I require a transcript to lodge an appeal. While on the call, I attempted to request the transcript from Qtranscipt. There was no record of a transcript. I was then instructed by QCAT telephone consultant to send an email to [email protected] to obtain the transcript. I waited for QCAT to reply with the transcript requested. However, that did not happen.
On the 26 May 2025, I personally attended the QCAT registry in Brisbane. I met Nicholas from the Appeals Team. Nicholas said that the information provided to me by the QCAT telephone consultant was not correct and that because of this, QCAT would consider favourably an application for an extension of time.
Respondent’s submissions in reply
The respondent (‘GLC Partners’) has filed submissions in reply to the extension of time application. It sets out the background to the application.
GLC Partners were appointed by Sheetal and Rhian Bull to sell their residential home at 72 Crosby Road, Albion.
On 12 February 2025 Dr Quach made application to the Tribunal for a minor civil dispute – consumer/trader dispute (‘original application’). He alleges he was deceived by GLC Partners when he made an offer and entered a contract of sale to purchase the residential property.
Dr Quach, on the same day, made application to the Tribunal for a stay order on the ground he was deceived by GLC Partners. The Tribunal dismissed the application on 13 February 2025.
On 14 February 2025 the Tribunal gave directions in the following terms:
1. The Tribunal intends to consider whether the application for minor civil dispute - consumer trader dispute should be dismissed on the grounds that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear it. This is because:
(a)Section 12 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act) confers the Tribunal’s jurisdiction over minor civil disputes. A minor civil dispute is relevantly defined as a claim arising out of a contract between a consumer and trader.
(b)Consumer and trader are terms defined in Schedule 3 of the QCAT Act where, relevantly a consumer is an individual for whom services are supplied for fee other than in a trade or business carried on by the individual and a trader is a person who in trade or commerce carries on a business of supplying services other than when acting in the exercise of a discipline that is not ordinarily regarded as within the field of trade or commerce.
(c)In Early Property Group Pty Ltd t/a Early Group Valuers v Cavallaro [2010] QCATA 65, Deputy President Kingham J, stated, in considering whether a valuer came within the exception to the definition of trader:
[17]If the exemption in the definition of trader in the QCAT Act is to have any application at all, it must operate to exclude professionals whose disciplines are not ordinarily regarded as within the field of trade or commerce. A discipline is:
1.A branch of instruction or learning.
[18]Santow J explored the meaning of profession in Prestia v Aknar. He offered the following as a working definition:
This would embrace intellectual activity, or manual activity controlled by the intellectual skill of the operator, whereby services are offered to the public, usually though not inevitably for reward and requiring professional standards of competence, training and ethics, typically reinforced by some form of official accreditation accompanied by evidence of qualification.
[19]That formulation is, respectfully, a helpful one in interpreting the meaning of the exemption in the definition of trader in the QCAT Act.
(d)Real estate agents have been found to exercise a profession or discipline and, therefore, have been found to fall outside the definition of trader for QCAT's jurisdiction.
2. Each party is directed to file in the Tribunal and give a copy to the other party of their submissions on the question of jurisdiction, namely, whether the respondent is a trader as defined in the QCAT Act, by 4:00pm on 8 March 2025.
3. The Tribunal will determine the question of jurisdiction on the papers, based on the written submissions of the parties, after 4:00pm on 8 March 2025. If the application is not dismissed for want of jurisdiction, it will be listed for a final hearing.
On 12 March 2025 the Tribunal dismissed the proceeding. Dr Quach, on 20 March 2025, sent an email to the Tribunal asking for reasons for the decision ‘… so that I can Appeal.’
On 5 June 2025 Dr Quach filed the appeal application.
The Tribunal gave directions for the filing of the extension of time application on 17 June 2025.
On 2 July 2025 Dr Quach filed the extension of time application.
The Tribunal, on 18 June 2025, handed down reasons for decision in the original application.
GLC Partners’ submissions in reply go on to outline reasons for not granting the extension of time application. The submissions are unnecessary given an extension of time is not required for the reasons following.
Legislation
A right of appeal against a decision of the Tribunal in a proceeding is found in section 142 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (‘QCAT Act’). Subsection (1) provides:
A party to a proceeding may appeal to the appeal tribunal against a decision of the tribunal in the proceeding if a judicial member did not constitute the tribunal in the proceeding.
The decision in the proceeding is a decision for a minor civil dispute. Dr Quach therefore requires the Appeal Tribunal’s leave to appeal.[1]
[1]QCAT Act s 142(3)(a)(i).
Section 143 of the QCAT Act provides for appealing or applying for leave to appeal. The application or appeal must:
(a)be in a form substantially complying with the rules;
(b)state the reasons for the application or appeal; and
(c)be accompanied by the prescribed fee (if any).
Importantly, an application for the Appeal Tribunal’s leave to appeal must be filed in the registry within 28 days after the relevant day. Relevant day for an application or appeal is defined in section 143(5). Relevantly, the definition includes the day the person is given written reasons for the decision being appealed against. The time may be extended by the tribunal under section 61(1) of the QCAT Act.
Consideration
The proceeding was dismissed on 12 March 2025. Dr Quach asked the Tribunal for reasons for the decision eight days later, on 20 March 2025. On 5 June 2025, 13 days before the reasons for the decision were handed down, Dr Quach filed the appeal application.
It follows, in my opinion, the appeal application was filed in the Tribunal within the time prescribed by section 143(5)(c). Indeed, it was filed before the day specified in the section commenced.
The extension of time application must be dismissed on the ground it is not required.
Further directions
Further directions are required. I direct and order as follows:
Extension of time application
1.The application by Dr Quach filed 2 July 2025 is dismissed on the ground an extension of time to file in the Registry the application for leave to appeal and appeal is not required.
Application for leave to appeal and appeal
2.Dr Quach file in the Tribunal two copies and give to GLC Partners by email one copy of any submissions on the application for leave to appeal and appeal, by:
4:00pm on 12 November 2025
3.GLC Partners file in the Tribunal two copies and give to Dr Quach by email one copy of any submissions in reply to Dr Quach’s submissions, by:
4:00pm on 26 November 2025
4.Dr Quach file in the Tribunal two copies and give to GLC Partners by email one copy of any submissions in reply to the submissions of GLC Partners, by:
4:00pm on 10 December 2025
5.Unless the Tribunal otherwise directs or orders, the application for leave to appeal and appeal be conducted entirely on the basis of the documents, without the parties, their representatives or witnesses appearing at a hearing under section 32(2) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative TribunalAct 2009 (Qld) (on the papers), after:
10 December 2025
Service of the directions and orders
6.These directions and orders be served on the parties by email.
Decision
The decision of the Tribunal is set out in the preceding paragraph.
0
1
0