Tow.com.au Pty Ltd v Moffatt - [2017] QCATA 55

CITATION:

Tow.com.au Pty Ltd v Moffatt & ors [2017] QCATA 55

PARTIES:	Tow.com.au Pty Ltd (Applicant/Appellant)
v
Adrian Carl Moffatt (Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER:	APL404-16
PARTIES:	Tow.com.au Pty Ltd (Applicant/Appellant)
v
Mark Iain Fuller (Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER:	APL405-16
PARTIES:	Tow.com.au Pty Ltd (Applicant/Appellant)
v
Melanie Kalirwa (Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER:	APL407-16
PARTIES:	Tow.com.au Pty Ltd (Applicant/Appellant)
v
Daniel Joseph Mudford (Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER:	APL408-16
MATTER TYPE:	Appeals

HEARING DATE:

24 April 2017

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Senior Member Stilgoe OAM

DELIVERED ON:

15 May 2017

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

IN ALL OF THE APPEALS:

1. The time for filing an application for leave to appeal the decisions of 13 May 2016 is extended to 29 November 2016.

2. Leave to appeal granted.

3. The appeal is allowed.

4. The decisions of 13 May 2016 are set aside.

AS TO EACH APPEAL:

5. In APL404-16, the Appeal Tribunal directs the Principal Registrar to issue a decision in default of appearance requiring Adrian Carl Moffatt to pay $3593.74.

6. In APL405-16, the Appeal Tribunal directs the Principal Registrar to issue a decision in default of appearance requiring Mark Iain Fuller to pay $3596.85.

7. In APL407-16, the Appeal Tribunal directs the Principal Registrar to issue a decision in default of appearance requiring Melanie Kalirwa to pay $4407.24.

8. In APL408-16, the Appeal Tribunal directs the Principal Registrar to issue a decision in default of appearance requiring Daniel Joseph Mudford to pay $3656.80.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL – LEAVE TO APPEAL – PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – ENDING PROCEEDINGS EARLY – DEFAULT JUDGMENT – judgment in default of pleadings or particulars – where respondent failed to file a response to a minor debt claim – where applicant applied for default judgment – where default judgment was refused – where applicant was made to prove debt claim at hearing – whether this was the appropriate procedure – whether grounds for leave to appeal

Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 112
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) ss 61, 50, 142(3)(a)(i)
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009 (Qld) r 60.
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) r 281

Coppens v Water Wise Design Pty Ltd [2014] QCATA 309
Crime and Misconduct Commission v Chapman and Anor [2011] QCAT 229
Cusack v De Angelis [2007] QCA 313
Pickering v McArthur [2005] QCA 294

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION:

APPLICANT:

C Heilbronn, solicitor, Minter Ellison

RESPONDENT:

No appearance.

REASONS FOR DECISION

Each of the respondents to this application for leave to appeal had their motor vehicles impounded under the ‘hooning’ provisions of the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) (PPRA). Each of them was liable to pay the costs of towing and storing their motor vehicles.[1]
[1]Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld) s 112.
The Queensland Police Service (QPS) engaged Tow.com.au Pty Ltd to manage the towing and storage of impounded vehicles. Tow.com.au issued an invoice to each of the respondents setting out the towing and storage costs…

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.

Continue reading Tow.com.au Pty Ltd v Moffatt

Details

AGLC: Tow.com.au Pty Ltd v Moffatt [2017] QCATA 55
Case: [2017] QCATA 55
Decision Date: 15 May 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Tow.com.au Pty Ltd sought to recover unpaid parking fines from four respondents through the Civil Claims List of the ACT Magistrates Court. The company filed minor debt claims against each respondent, who did not file responses. Tow.com.au applied for default judgments, which were initially refused. The company was required to prove the debt claims at a hearing, leading to dissatisfaction with the court’s handling of the matter. Tow.com.au appealed the refusal of the default judgments, and the four respondents cross-appealed the eventual default judgments against them.

The primary issue for the appeal was whether the court correctly refused the default judgments and required Tow.com.au to prove its debt claims at a hearing. A secondary issue was whether there were grounds for granting leave to appeal the decision. The appeal focused on the interpretation and application of the relevant legislation and rules governing minor debt claims and default judgments.

The court found that the refusal of the default judgments and the requirement to prove the debt claims was an error of law. The court considered that the statutory provisions and rules allowed for default judgments in cases where a respondent fails to file a response. The court emphasised that the primary purpose of the Civil Claims List is to efficiently resolve minor debt claims, and requiring proof of the debt was inconsistent with this objective. Consequently, the court granted leave to appeal and allowed the appeals, setting aside the original decisions. It directed the Principal Registrar to issue decisions in default of appearance against each respondent, requiring them to pay the amounts claimed.

The orders of the court included extending the time for filing an application for leave to appeal, granting leave to appeal, allowing the appeals, and setting aside the original decisions. For each appeal, the Appeal Tribunal directed the Principal Registrar to issue a decision in default of appearance against the respective respondent, specifying the amount to be paid.

Orders

Orders of the court

IN ALL OF THE APPEALS:

1. The time for filing an application for leave to appeal the decisions of 13 May 2016 is extended to 29 November 2016.

2. Leave to appeal granted.

3. The appeal is allowed.

4. The decisions of 13 May 2016 are set aside.

AS TO EACH APPEAL:

5. In APL404-16, the Appeal Tribunal directs the Principal Registrar to issue a decision in default of appearance requiring Adrian Carl Moffatt to pay $3593.74.

6. In APL405-16, the Appeal Tribunal directs the Principal Registrar to issue a decision in default of appearance requiring Mark Iain Fuller to pay $3596.85.

7. In APL407-16, the Appeal Tribunal directs the Principal Registrar to issue a decision in default of appearance requiring Melanie Kalirwa to pay $4407.24.

8. In APL408-16, the Appeal Tribunal directs the Principal Registrar to issue a decision in default of appearance requiring Daniel Joseph Mudford to pay $3656.80.

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.