Richards & Anor v Queensland Building and Construction Commission & Anor (No 2)

The applicants, Richards and another, brought proceedings against the Queensland Building and Construction Commission and another, seeking to overturn a decision to refuse cover under the statutory insurance scheme. The matter was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The core dispute revolved around the Commission's refusal to provide insurance cover under the statutory scheme and whether the Commission had afforded the applicants natural justice in making its initial decision.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the applicants were entitled to costs after their successful challenge to the Commission's decision. The applicants argued that they were forced to engage legal representation to have their rights vindicated due to the Commission's procedural failings and the subsequent inadequate internal review processes. The court needed to determine if the applicants' strong case and the Commission's failure to appropriately utilise its internal review procedures warranted the award of costs to the applicants. Additionally, the court had to decide if prudence dictated any reduction in the costs awarded due to the applicants' solicitors' failure to particularise their invoices.

The court found that the applicants had a strong case and that the Commission did not afford them natural justice in making its initial decision. The internal review procedures and reconsideration of the decision after proceedings had commenced were not appropriately utilised, resulting in disadvantage to the applicants. It was in the interests of justice that the applicants recover costs. However, the court noted that prudence dictated a reduction in the amount assessed as appropriate due to the applicants' solicitors' failure to particularise their invoices. Consequently, the court ordered that the Commission pay the applicants $40,000 for costs.