Richards v Chopperworks Pty Limited (externally administered) - [2017] QCAT 453

CITATION:	Richards v Chopperworks Pty Limited (externally administered) & Ors [2017] QCAT 453
PARTIES:	Adam Richards (Applicant)
v
Chopperworks Pty Limited (externally administered) (First Respondent) Jeffrey Brian Richardson (Second Respondent) Samantha Jocelyn Richardson (Third Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER:	OCL015-17
MATTER TYPE:	Occupational regulation matters
HEARING DATE:	22 November 2017
HEARD AT:	Brisbane
DECISION OF:	Member Olding
DELIVERED ON:	24 November 2017
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
ORDERS MADE:	1. The claim against the Claim Fund lodged by Adam Richards on 5 September 2012 is wholly allowed. 2. The amount of Adam Richards’ financial loss is Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000). 3. Chopperworks Pty Limited (externally administered), Jeffrey Brian Richardson and Samantha Jocelyn Richardson are named as the persons liable for Adam Richards’ loss of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000). 4. Upon payment from the Claim Fund, Jeffrey Brian Richardson and Samantha Jocelyn Richardson (and Chopperworks Pty Limited (externally administered) unless or until the Tribunal orders that no amount is to be reimbursed by it) are jointly and severally liable to reimburse the Claim Fund by paying the amount of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000) to the Chief Executive, Department of Justice and Attorney-General. 5. Any party wishing to submit that an order that no amount is to be reimbursed to the Claim Fund by Chopperworks Pty Ltd (externally administered) should be made must file in the Tribunal two (2) copies and give to each of the other parties one (1) copy of written submissions, by 4:00pm on 8 December 2017. 6. Any party wishing to make submissions in response to any submission made under order 5 must file in the Tribunal two (2) copies and give to each of the other parties one (1) copy of written submissions in response, by 4:00pm on 22 December 2017. 7. If any submissions are received by the Tribunal under orders 5 and 6 above, the Tribunal will determine on the papers without a further oral hearing whether to make an order that no amount is to be reimbursed to the Claim Fund by Chopperworks Pty Ltd (externally administered).
CATCHWORDS:	PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – AUCTIONEERS AND AGENTS – STATUTORY OR OTHER FIDELITY OR COMPENSATION FUND – where claimant paid deposit to motor dealer – where motor dealer falsely represented that motorcycle being imported for sale to claimant – where claimant claimed against claim fund Agents Financial Administration Act 2014 (Qld), s 105, s 106, s 155, Schedule 1 (“executive officer”) Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 (Qld), s 470, s 488, s 573, s 574 Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, s 4(d), s 93 Brown & Anor v Wilen Pty Ltd & Ors [2012] QCAT 324 Mann & Mann v McCreath [2016] QCAT 477 Rees v Mighty Enterprises Pty Ltd & Ors [2015] QCAT 312 Turnbull v McCreath & Ors [2017] QCAT 190
APPEARANCES:
APPLICANT:	Adam Richards
FIRST RESPONDENT:	No appearance
SECOND RESPONDENT:	No appearance
THIRD RESPONDENT:	No appearance

REPRESENTATIVES:
APPLICANT:	Adam Richards appeared in person
RESPONDENTS:	Not applicable

REASONS FOR DECISION

Following representations from one of…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Richards v Chopperworks Pty Limited (externally administered... and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2017] QCAT 453
Decision Date: 24 November 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Adam Richards brought proceedings against Chopperworks Pty Limited (externally administered), Jeffrey Brian Richardson, Samantha Jocelyn Richardson, and the Claim Fund, seeking compensation for a deposit he paid for a motorcycle which he claimed was falsely represented by the defendants. The dispute was heard by the Civil and Administrative Tribunal (CAT). The central issue before the Tribunal was whether the claim lodged by Richards against the Claim Fund was valid and, if so, the amount of compensation to be awarded. Additionally, the Tribunal needed to determine the liability of the defendants and the extent to which they should reimburse the Claim Fund.

The Tribunal found that Richards' claim against the Claim Fund was valid and that he had suffered a financial loss of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000) due to the misrepresentation by the defendants. The Tribunal held that Chopperworks Pty Limited, Jeffrey Brian Richardson, and Samantha Jocelyn Richardson were liable for the loss. The Tribunal also ordered that upon payment from the Claim Fund, the Richardsons (and Chopperworks Pty Limited unless or until the Tribunal orders otherwise) are jointly and severally liable to reimburse the Claim Fund Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000). The Tribunal set a timeline for any party to file submissions regarding whether Chopperworks Pty Limited should be reimbursed by the Claim Fund.

The Tribunal's final orders include the allowance of Richards' claim against the Claim Fund, the determination of the amount of loss, and the establishment of liability of the defendants. Additionally, the Tribunal provided a procedure for any party to submit written submissions regarding the reimbursement of Chopperworks Pty Limited from the Claim Fund.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The claim against the Claim Fund lodged by Adam Richards on 5 September 2012 is wholly allowed.

2. The amount of Adam Richards’ financial loss is Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000).

3. Chopperworks Pty Limited (externally administered), Jeffrey Brian Richardson and Samantha Jocelyn Richardson are named as the persons liable for Adam Richards’ loss of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000).

4. Upon payment from the Claim Fund, Jeffrey Brian Richardson and Samantha Jocelyn Richardson (and Chopperworks Pty Limited (externally administered) unless or until the Tribunal orders that no amount is to be reimbursed by it) are jointly and severally liable to reimburse the Claim Fund by paying the amount of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000) to the Chief Executive, Department of Justice and Attorney-General.

5. Any party wishing to submit that an order that no amount is to be reimbursed to the Claim Fund by Chopperworks Pty Ltd (externally administered) should be made must file in the Tribunal two (2) copies and give to each of the other parties one (1) copy of written submissions, by 4:00pm on 8 December 2017.

6. Any party wishing to make submissions in response to any submission made under order 5 must file in the Tribunal two (2) copies and give to each of the other parties one (1) copy of written submissions in response, by 4:00pm on 22 December 2017.

7. If any submissions are received by the Tribunal under orders 5 and 6 above, the Tribunal will determine on the papers without a further oral hearing whether to make an order that no amount is to be reimbursed to the Claim Fund by Chopperworks Pty Ltd (externally administered).

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.