Queensland Building Services Authority v Glorious Constructions Pty Ltd (No 2)

CITATION: Queensland Building Services Authority v Glorious Constructions Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] QCAT 484

PARTIES:	Queensland Building Services Authority
v
Glorious Constructions Pty Ltd

APPLICATION NUMBER:   OCR041-11

MATTER TYPE: Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE: On the papers

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Peta Stilgoe, Senior Member

DELIVERED ON: 28 September 2012

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:     

1.    Queensland Building Services Authority will pay Glorious Constructions Pty Ltd’s costs of and incidental to the proceeding to be agreed or assessed by way of a short form assessment from a cost assessor, on a standard basis in accordance with the District Court scale of costs.

2.    If the Queensland Building Services Authority does not accept the short form assessment:

a.    Queensland Building Services Authority shall file a copy of the short form assessment and its objections to the short form assessment.

b.    The tribunal will fix the costs, having regard to the short form assessment and any objections.

CATCHWORDS:

COSTS – where disciplinary proceedings – where lawyers engaged – whether costs order in the interests of justice

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, ss 43(2)(b)(ii), 100, 102(3)

Tamawood Ltd & Anor v Paans [2005] QCA 111
Ralacom Pty Ltd v Body Corporate for Paradise Island Apartments (No 2) [2010] QCAT 412
Veterinary Surgeons Board of Queensland v McIntosh [2011] QCAT 417

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

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

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. On 19 June 2012[1], I dismissed the Authority’s application for disciplinary proceedings against Glorious Constructions Pty Ltd.

   [1]Queensland Building Services Authority v Glorious Constructions Pty Ltd [2012] QCAT 246.

2. Glorious Constructions wants the Authority to pay its costs of the application on the District Court Scale.  The Authority opposes the application but says that, if the tribunal does decide to award costs, it should be a “modest amount”.

3. The usual position is that each party bears its own costs.[2]  The tribunal may make an order for costs if the interests of justice require it[3]. Section 102(3) sets out the matters the tribunal may have regard to when considering an application for costs. Justice Wilson has provided guidance for the application of the principles in s 102(3)[4]:

   Under the QCAT Act the question that will usually arise in each case in which costs are sought is whether the circumstances relevant to the discretion inherent in the phrase ‘the interests of justice’ point so compellingly to a costs award that they overcome the strong contra-indication against costs orders in s 100.

   [2] Section 100 Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009.

   [3]        Section 102(1).

   [4]Ralacom Pty Ltd v Body Corporate for Paradise Island Apartments (No 2) [2010] QCAT 412 at [29].

4. Glorious Constructions does not suggest that the Authority acted in a way that unnecessarily disadvantaged it in the proceeding[5].  However, both parties suggest that the behaviour of the other unnecessarily lengthened the proceeding.…