Warner v Isaac Regional Council

Case [2015] QDC 186

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Warner v Isaac Regional Council [2015] QDC 186

PARTIES:

JANICE WARNER
(appellant)

v

ISAAC REGIONAL COUNCIL
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

35/15

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Appeal

ORIGINATING COURT:

Magistrates Court, Mackay

DELIVERED ON:

30 July 2015

DELIVERED AT:

Mackay

HEARING DATE:

27 July 2015

JUDGE:

Smith DCJA

ORDER:

1.  The appeal is allowed.

2.  The order made by the Magistrates Court at Mackay on 19 March 2015 is set aside and in lieu thereof it is ordered that the plaintiff’s application is dismissed and the costs of and incidental to the application are reserved to the trial magistrate.

3. The respondent is to provide further and better particulars of its claim in answer to paragraphs 1(a) and (g) as amended in this judgment and 2 of the appellant’s request dated 10 February 2015. 

4.  The respondent is to pay the appellant’s costs of and incidental to the appeal to be assessed on the standard basis.

CATCHWORDS:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – APPLICATION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT – whether triable issues raised by the appellant – whether further and better particulars of the statement of claim should be ordered

Acts Interpretation Act 1954 (Q) schedule 1

District Court Act 1967 (Q) s 113

Magistrates Court Act 1921 (Q) s 47

Public Health Act 2005 (Q) ss 5, 27, 30, 31, 366, 422

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Q) r 3, 150, 157, 292, 765, 785

Agar v Hyde (2000) 201 CLR 552

Allesch v Maunz (2000) 203 CLR 172

Annetts v McCann (1990) 170 CLR 596.

Batistatos v Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) (2006) 226 CLR 256

Body Corporate for Sunseeker Apartments v Jasen [2012] QDC 51

Fancourt v Mercantile Credits Ltd (1983) 154 CLR 87

Gardiner v Hornsby Shire Council [2000] NSWLEC 37

Gubbins v Wyndham City Council (2004) 9 VR 620

Isbester v Knox City Council (2015) 320 ALR 432; 89 ALJR 689

JJ Richards & Sons Pty Ltd v Precast Concrete Pty Ltd [2010] QDC 272

Owners of Strata Plan 36131 v Dimitriou [2009] NSWCA 27

Parsons v Raby [2007] QCA 98

Qld Pork Pty Ltd v Lott [2003] QCA 271

Quirindi Shire Council v Gigli (1985) 3 NSWLR 178

Spencer v The Commonwealth (2010) 241 CLR 118

Teelow v Commissioner of Police [2009] 2 Qd R 489

Woollahra Municipal Council v Baranov [2006] NSWLEC 97

COUNSEL:

Mr S McLennan for the appellant

Solicitors for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Beckey, Knight and Elliott for the appellant

SR Wallace and Wallace for the respondent

Introduction

  1. This is an appeal against the decision of the Magistrates Court at Mackay given on 19 March 2015 to enter summary judgment against the appellant, to dismiss the appellant’s application for further and better particulars and for the appellant to pay the respondent’s costs.

Nature of the appeal

  1. This appeal is pursuant to s 47 of the Magistrates Court Act 1921 (Q). This section provides: 

“47 Jurisdiction of the District Court

On the hearing of an appeal or special case, the…

Continue reading Warner v Isaac Regional Council

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Warner v Isaac Regional Council [2015] QDC 186
Case
[2015] QDC 186
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Warner, as the appellant, was involved in a dispute with Isaac Regional Council, the respondent, concerning an application for summary judgment. The case originated in the Magistrates Court at Mackay and was appealed to a higher court. The appellant challenged the respondent's application for summary judgment, asserting that the respondent's statement of claim contained insufficient details and that the application should be dismissed. The appellant further argued that the respondent should provide more specific information about their claims, as required by certain paragraphs of the appellant's request for particulars.

The primary legal issues the court had to resolve were whether the respondent's application for summary judgment raised any triable issues and whether the respondent should be compelled to provide further and better particulars of their claim. The court considered whether the respondent's statement of claim was sufficiently detailed to warrant summary judgment and if additional information was necessary to allow the appellant to respond adequately to the claims.

The court found that the respondent's application for summary judgment did not raise any triable issues and that the respondent's statement of claim lacked the necessary detail in certain areas. The court also ruled that the respondent should provide further and better particulars to address the deficiencies identified. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the order made by the Magistrates Court at Mackay was set aside, and the respondent's application for summary judgment was dismissed. Additionally, the respondent was ordered to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal, which were to be assessed on the standard basis.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The appeal is allowed.

2. The order made by the Magistrates Court at Mackay on 19 March 2015 is set aside and in lieu thereof it is ordered that the plaintiff’s application is dismissed and the costs of and incidental to the application are reserved to the trial magistrate.

3. The respondent is to provide further and better particulars of its claim in answer to paragraphs 1(a) and (g) as amended in this judgment and 2 of the appellant’s request dated 10 February 2015.

4. The respondent is to pay the appellant’s costs of and incidental to the appeal to be assessed on the standard basis.

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.