Singh v Chief Executive of the Department of Transport and Main Roads
[2010] QCAT 497
•8 October 2010
| CITATION: | Singh v Chief Executive of the Department of Transport and Main Roads [2010] QCAT 497 |
| PARTIES: | Baljinder SINGH |
| v | |
| Chief Executive of the Department of Transport and Main Roads |
| APPLICATION NUMBER: | GAR188-10 |
| MATTER TYPE: | General administrative review matters |
| HEARING DATE: | 8 October 2010 |
| HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
| DECISION OF: | C Endicott, senior member |
| DELIVERED ON: | 8 October 2010 |
| DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
ORDERS MADE: | Application to strike out this review dismissed |
| CATCHWORDS : | PRE-HEARING DISMISSAL – section 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 – contention that there was no substance to review application |
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
The hearing took place on the papers in the absence of the parties.
REASONS FOR DECISION
On 19 May 2010 Baljinder Singh lodged an application in the Tribunal seeking a review of a decision made by the Chief Executive of the Department of Transport and Main Roads (the respondent) to refuse to renew a driver authorisation held by him.
During the course of this review process, the Tribunal directed Mr Singh on 25 August 2010 to file in the Tribunal and serve on the respondent an amended application for review and written submissions supporting an amended review application by 13 September 2010. Mr Singh has not complied with that direction and has not provided any explanation for his failure to do so.
On 28 September 2010 the respondent filed an application to strike out the review application on the grounds that Mr Singh has not provided any relevant grounds for seeking a review of the decision to refuse a renewal of his driver authorisation. The respondent has informed the Tribunal that a copy of the strike out application has been served on Mr Singh. He has not responded to that application.
Section 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (the Act) gives the Tribunal power to bring a proceeding to an early end if the Tribunal considers that an application is frivolous, vexatious or misconceived or is lacking in substance or is otherwise an abuse of process.
It is a very serious matter for a Tribunal to dismiss an application for review of a decision made by a government regulator, such as the respondent, without allowing a hearing of that application to take place. Dismissal of his review application without a hearing taking place would deprive Mr Singh of the opportunity to have an independent body make a determination about his complaints that the decision to refuse to renew his driver authorisation was wrong. A case must be clearly made out to support a dismissal.
The directions made by the Tribunal on 25 August 2010 provided Mr Singh with an opportunity to put forward further grounds supporting his review application. There is no explanation as to why he has not done so. The respondent has not submitted that a review is not open to Mr Singh in this case. The contention has been made that the grounds relied on by Mr Singh are not relevant to the published reasons for the decision actually made.
The Tribunal is not prepared to strike out a review application at this stage when to do so would prevent Mr Singh from pursuing an avenue to restore his likelihood to him. The review should be determined and not brought to an end before Mr Singh has an opportunity to present his case, if he chooses to do so, by way of participation in a hearing. Should Mr Singh fail to present his case in a manner that addresses the reasons for the refusal to renew his driver authorisation, then the review may well be unsuccessful but the Tribunal would have provided him with the opportunity to be heard in a fair and just environment.
The application to strike out this review is dismissed.
1
0
0