Robertson v Airstrike Industrial Pty Ltd

In the case of Robertson v Airstrike Industrial Pty Ltd, the applicants initially succeeded in their claim against the claim fund under the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 (Qld) in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). The respondent subsequently appealed the decision to the appeal tribunal of QCAT, which dismissed the applicants' claim. The applicants then sought an extension of time to appeal from the decision of the appeal tribunal, which was filed after almost 17 months from the final decision. The applicants tendered expert psychological evidence to support their application.

The court was required to determine whether it should consider the expert psychological evidence in light of the applicants' decision not to appeal within time. The court also needed to decide if the circumstances were compelling enough to justify an extension of time. Additionally, the court had to consider whether an appeal would have reasonable prospects of success and if success on appeal would likely finally dispose of the proceeding or if further proceedings before QCAT would be required.

The court found that the applicants had not established compelling circumstances to justify an extension of time. The court noted that the applicants had been advised that their prospects on appeal were poor, which undermined the justification for an extension. The court also held that the appeal would not be “only on a question of law” as required by the Act, as it would involve questions of fact and evidence, which are not appealable. Therefore, the application for an extension of time was refused.

The court ordered that the application to extend time to apply for leave to appeal be refused. The applicants were also ordered to pay the respondent’s costs unless the parties file written submissions as to costs in accordance with paragraph 52 of Practice Direction No 3 of 2013 within seven days.