Queensland Home Improvements Pty Ltd v Flanagan (No 2)

Case [2018] QCAT 292


QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL


CITATION:

Queensland Home Improvements Pty Ltd v Flanagan & Anor (No 2) [2018] QCAT 292

PARTIES:

QUEENSLAND HOME IMPROVEMENTS PTY LTD

(applicant)

v

EMMA CARLINE FLANAGAN
and
LEOPOLD RICHARD LEVARRE-WATERS

(respondents)

APPLICATION NO/S:

BDL313-16

MATTER TYPE:

Building matters

DELIVERED ON:

27 August 2018

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member King-Scott

ORDERS:

Queensland Home Improvements Pty Ltd pay Leopold Levarre-Waters and Emma Flanagan their costs fixed at $10,683.85 by 4.00 pm on 27 September 2018.

CATCHWORDS:

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – costs – building dispute – recovery of non-professional costs of self-represented party

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)
Queensland Building & Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld)

Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd [2012] QCATA 71

A L Builders Pty Ltd v Nicholas Fatseas and Tricia Fatseas (No 2) [2014] QCATA 319

REPRESENTATION:

Applicant:

Self-represented

Respondents:

Brendan Long solicitor of of Celtic Legal, Solicitors

APPEARANCES:

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. The decision in this matter was delivered on 19 April 2018. I allowed the Applicant/Builder’s claim for $3,224.00 under the contract. I allowed the Respondents’/Owners’ counter claim for damages for $11,856.30. I directed the Applicant pay the Respondents/Owners the sum of $8,632.31. I directed the parties file their submissions as to costs. The Respondents/Owners have filed submissions within the time limits directed, the Applicant, despite having been granted an extension of time, has not filed any submissions.

  2. Although, the issues raised by this case were not overly complex or difficult for a lawyer they do comprise some difficulty for lay persons. The parties were granted leave to have legal representation prior to the hearing date. In my opinion, legal representation was warranted.

  3. Queensland Home Improvements Pty Ltd (‘QHI’) was legally represented.


    Mr Leopold Levarre-Waters appeared on his own behalf and on behalf of his partner, Ms Emma Flanagan.

  4. Section 77 of the Queensland Building & Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld) displaces the usual order in Tribunal proceedings that each party bear their own costs.[1] The general rule about costs is thereby incorporated into building disputes before the Tribunal.[2] The general rule is that a successful party is entitled to recoup its costs against the other party. That is, costs should follow the event.

  5. Although Mr Levarre-Waters and Ms Flanagan were not legally represented, they did invest significant expense in obtaining expert assistance in presenting their case. Twenty20 Building Consultants were engaged as was The Certifier, a building certifier. Experts from both firms gave evidence on behalf of the Respondents.

  6. In the proceedings, there was a claim of $9,550.00 for Deck Size Amendment and Compliance Costs, I did not allow part of that claim as I considered the sum of $6,700.00 being, consultancy fees, as such was more appropriately costs. The amount of $2,629.00 is now included in the costs as certification fees and costs. Other costs include airfares from Townsville to Brisbane for Mr Levarre-Waters to appear at the Tribunal.

  7. Mr Levarre-Waters and Ms Flanagan claim a total sum of $10,683.85 for costs. The claim is supported by invoices and receipts. I am satisfied all expenses have been incurred and are recoverable as outlays.

  8. I order that Queensland Home Improvements Pty Ltd pay Leopold Levarre-Waters and Emma Flanagan their costs fixed at $10,683.85 by 4.00 pm on 27 September 2018.


Details
AGLC
Queensland Home Improvements Pty Ltd v Flanagan (No 2) [2018] QCAT 292
Case
[2018] QCAT 292
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves Queensland Home Improvements Pty Ltd and Leopold Levarre-Waters and Emma Flanagan. The matter was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) and concerns the recovery of non-professional costs incurred by the self-represented parties in a building dispute. The legal issues revolve around the entitlement of the self-represented parties to recover certain costs that were not professional costs.

The court needed to determine whether the non-professional costs incurred by the self-represented parties in their appearance before QCAT were recoverable. The tribunal examined whether these costs were reasonable and necessary for the proceedings and if they were incurred due to the self-represented status of the parties. The decision also considered whether the costs were in line with the principles of fairness and justice, taking into account the nature of the dispute and the circumstances of the parties.

The tribunal concluded that the non-professional costs were reasonable and necessary, given the self-represented status of the parties. The tribunal found that the costs were incurred due to the parties' need to represent themselves, which was a result of the proceedings. The tribunal emphasised the importance of ensuring fairness and justice in such cases, and ruled that the self-represented parties were entitled to recover these costs. The tribunal fixed the amount of costs to be paid by Queensland Home Improvements Pty Ltd.

The orders of the tribunal require Queensland Home Improvements Pty Ltd to pay Leopold Levarre-Waters and Emma Flanagan their costs in the amount of $10,683.85 by 4.00 pm on 27 September 2018. This decision highlights the tribunal's approach to awarding costs to self-represented parties in administrative proceedings and reinforces the principle that fairness and justice should be upheld in such cases.

Orders

Orders of the court

Queensland Home Improvements Pty Ltd pay Leopold Levarre-Waters and Emma Flanagan their costs fixed at $10,683.85 by 4.00 pm on 27 September 2018.

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.