Wysocki v Etri

[2024] QCATA 104

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Wysocki v Etri [2024] QCATA 104

PARTIES:

ARKADIUSZ PETER WYSOCKI

(applicant/appellant)

v

ELIJAH ETRI 

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

APL0306-22

ORIGINATING APPLICATION NO/S:

MCDT0188/22 (Holland Park)

MATTER TYPE:

Appeals

HEARD ON:

3 September 2024

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

A/Senior Member Lember

ORDERS:

1.     Leave to appeal the decision of 26 September 2022 (MCDT0188/22 – Holland Park) is refused.

2.     The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – RIGHT OF APPEAL – WHEN APPEAL LIES – ERROR OF LAW – where lessor did not appear at the first instance hearing – where tenant awarded bond at end of tenancy – where lessor disputes the award and claims compensation – where no error of law – leave to appeal refused

Residential Tenancies and Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 Qld s 188, s 362, s 416, s 419, s 420, s 421

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 32, s 102, s143

Alderton & Anor v Wide Bay Constructions Pty Ltd [2017] QCATA 147

Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond (1990) 170 CLR 321
Cachia v Grech [2009] NSWCA 232
Glenwood Properties Pty Ltd v Delmoss Pty Ltd [1986] 2 Qd R 388
Griffin v Gini [2011] QCATA 325
Gubier v Queensland Department of Housing and Public Works [2020] QCATA 23
Hempel v Richardson & Wrench Hervey Bay [2018] QCATA 170
JM v QFG and KG [1998] QCA 228
McIver Bulk Liquid Haulage Pty Ltd v Fruehauf Australia Pty Ltd [1989] 2 Qd R 577
Meyer-Rochow v Lim & Anor [2017] QCATA 71
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZMDS & Another (2010) 240 CLR 611

QUYD Pty Ltd v Marvass Pty Ltd [2009] 1 Qd R 41

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:
Applicant/appellant:	Self-represented.
Respondent:	No appearance.

REASONS FOR DECISION

What is this application about?

1. Mr Wysocki applied for leave to appeal,[1] and, if successful, to appeal against a decision of the Tribunal below made on 26 September 2022 that awarded him only $100.00 of the $2,740.00 bond held for his tenancy with Mr Van Wyk and others (the decision).

   [1]Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act), s 143(3).

2. In determining whether to grant leave to appeal, the Appeal Tribunal must be satisfied that, relevantly:

   (a)there is a reasonably arguable case of error in the primary decision;[2]

   (b)there is a reasonable prospect that the appellant will obtain substantive relief;[3] and

   (c)leave is needed to correct a substantial injustice caused by the error;[4] or

   (d)there is a question of general importance upon which further argument, and a decision of the Appeal Tribunal, would be to the public advantage.[5]

   [2]QUYD Pty Ltd v Marvass Pty Ltd [2009] 1 Qd R 41.

   [3]Cachia v Grech [2009] NSWCA 232, 2.

   [4]QUYD Pty Ltd v Marvass Pty Ltd [2009] 1 Qd R 41.

   [5]Glenwood Properties Pty Ltd v Delmoss Pty Ltd [1986] 2 Qd R 388, 389; McIver Bulk Liquid Haulage Pty Ltd…