Sommers v Bycroft

[2020] QCATA 55

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Sommers v Bycroft [2020] QCATA 55

PARTIES:

MARY LYNNE SOMMERS

(appellant)

v

DANIEL PETER BYCROFT

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

APL187-19

ORIGINATING APPLICATION NO/S:

MCDT713/19 (Southport)

MATTER TYPE:

Appeals

DELIVERED ON:

23 April 2020

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Gordon

ORDERS:

The application for costs made by Daniel Peter Bycroft is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – POWERS OF COURT – COSTS – where appeal from an Adjudicator in a minor civil dispute was dismissed for non-compliance with the directions of the Appeal Tribunal – where application for costs by respondent to the appeal – whether the Appeal Tribunal can award costs in an appeal in a minor civil dispute

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COSTS – GENERAL MATTERS – POWER TO AWARD GENERALLY – STATUTORY BASIS GENERALLY – where appeal said to have no merit and was brought to frustrate the result of proceedings – where respondent to appeal inconvenienced by way appeal conducted – where party seeking legal costs had no leave for legal representation – whether it is in the interests of the justice to award costs

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 100, s 102
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009 (Qld), r 83, r 84

Maszlik v Lorraine Palmer t/as Bundaberg Park Lodge [2016] QCATA 94

Meiklejohn’s Accountants (Qld) Pty Ltd v Chen [2016] QCATA 1
Oatley v Pertzel [2011] QCATA 92

Sommers v Bycroft [2019] QCATA 130

REPRESENTATION:
Appellant:	Self-represented
Respondent:	Solicitor with Bell Legal Group
APPEARANCES:	This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. This is an application for costs in an appeal from a decision made by an Adjudicator in a residential tenancy application.  The Adjudicator had terminated the periodic tenancy of Mary Lynne Sommers on the ground that the lessor would suffer excessive hardship if the tenancy were not terminated.  The lessor was a representative of a deceased’s estate.  The Adjudicator issued a warrant for possession to give effect to the termination.

2. The tenant appealed to the Appeal Tribunal against that order and applied for a stay.  On 30 August 2019, the stay was refused by the Appeal Tribunal and the warrant for possession was reissued.[1] 

   [1]Reasons were given in writing and reported in Sommers v Bycroft [2019] QCAT 130.

3. Meanwhile the appeal continued, and the tenant was directed by the Appeal Tribunal in the usual way to file submissions in support of the appeal. The tenant applied for an extension of time to file such submissions and this was granted, but the directions warned the tenant that if submissions were not filed by the extended date, the appeal may be dismissed without further notice. The tenant did not file submissions and so, on 12 December 2019, the appeal was dismissed pursuant to section 48 of the Queensland…