Tremayne v Nunn - [2012] QCATA 9

CITATION:

Tremayne v Nunn [2012] QCATA 9

PARTIES:	Ms Toni Maree Tremayne (Applicant/Appellant)
v
Mark Robert Nunn (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

APL292-11

MATTER TYPE:

Appeals

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Richard Oliver, Senior Member

DELIVERED ON:

18 January 2012

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

Applications numbers 152/11 and 269/11 (Southport) together with the transcript of evidence in the original hearing and the submissions of the applicant in this application for leave to appeal be remitted to the minor civil disputes jurisdiction for reconsideration. 1.

The hearing of the applications be restricted to the matters raised in the appendices to Ms Tremayne’s submissions filed in the Appeal Tribunal on 27 September 2011.2.

CATCHWORDS:

Minor Civil Dispute – where applicant made a claim for rent from the respondent as a sub-tenant – whether debt or liquidated demand – whether tenancy matter – where evidence presented in the hearing was capable of establishing the amount payable for rent and other expenses – whether part of the claim ought to have been struck out – where evidence presented in a coherent fashion on appeal – whether appropriate to remit for reconsideration

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009, ss 142(3), 146 and Sch 3 definition of minor civil dispute
Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008

Regent v Millett (1976) 133 CLR 679

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009 (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

On 27 July 2011 the Tribunal made an order that Ms Tremayne pay to Mr Nunn $3,000 within 14 days. That decision came after a lengthy hearing where the learned Adjudicator took evidence from both Mr Nunn and Ms Tremayne, considered a number of documents that were put before her, and gave comprehensive reasons for her decision.

From that decision, Ms Tremayne has filed an application for leave to appeal or appeal in the Appeal Tribunal. Leave to appeal is necessary because this is an appeal from a decision in a minor civil dispute jurisdiction[1]. Having regard to the array of issues before the Tribunal at first instance, the grounds for appeal are limited to a complaint that the Tribunal did not deal with her claim for arrears of rent from Mr Nunn and seeks an order that her application be referred back to the Tribunal for determination of that issue as a minor debt matter.
[1] QCAT Act, s 142(3).

To appreciate the nature of the relief sought some historical background is necessary. Both Mr Nunn and Ms Tremayne both filed separate applications in the Minor Civil Disputes jurisdiction. Mr Nunn’s claim was for $4,225.73 for monies lent to Ms Tremayne to purchase a Suzuki Ignis hatchback plus some extra money for mechanical services and registration.

Ms Tremayne’s claim on the other hand is for $9,957.88 which included claims for unpaid rent, electricity, wages and other unpaid bills whilst Ms Tremayne and Mr Nunn…

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 Tremayne v Nunn

Details

AGLC: Tremayne v Nunn [2012] QCATA 9
Case: [2012] QCATA 9
Decision Date: 18 January 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Tremayne v Nunn is a minor civil dispute involving a claim by Tremayne for rent and other expenses from Nunn, who was the sub-tenant. The matter was initially heard in the Magistrates' Court of Queensland, and the appeal was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). Tremayne sought to recover rent and expenses from Nunn, asserting that the amount owed was a liquidated demand rather than a matter to be determined by the court. The central legal issues were whether the claim constituted a debt or a liquidated demand, and if it was a matter to be resolved by the court. Additionally, there was a question of whether part of Tremayne's claim should have been struck out.

The court examined the evidence presented during the original hearing to determine if it could establish the amount payable for rent and other expenses. The court found that the evidence was presented coherently and was capable of establishing the amount owed. However, the court also noted that the evidence could have been more clearly presented to substantiate the claim. The court concluded that the matter ought to be remitted for reconsideration by the minor civil disputes jurisdiction. The reasoning was that the evidence, although capable of establishing the amount owed, was not presented in the most effective manner. The court believed that with a clearer presentation of evidence, the matter could be resolved more efficiently. The final orders included remitting the applications and the transcript of evidence back to the minor civil disputes jurisdiction for reconsideration, with the hearing restricted to the specific matters outlined in the appendices to Tremayne's submissions.

Orders

Orders of the court

The hearing of the applications be restricted to the matters raised in the appendices to Ms Tremayne’s submissions filed in the Appeal Tribunal on 27 September 2011.2.

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.