Johnson v Unicom Santronic Importers and Wholesalers [2011] QCATA 39 (1 March 2011)

Last Updated: 31 March 2011

CITATION:

Johnson v Unicom Santronic Importers and Wholesalers [2011] QCATA 39

PARTIES:	Mr Wayne Johnson & Ms Toni Johnson (Applicants/Appellants)
	v
	Unicom Santronic Importers and Wholesalers (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

APL339-10

MATTER TYPE:

Appeals

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Richard Oliver, Senior Member

DELIVERED ON:

1 March 2011

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

Leave to appeal refused.

CATCHWORDS:

Minor civil dispute – default decision regularly entered – no error of law or fact Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, ss 50, 51, 142(3)

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

This matter was heard on the papers, pursuant to section 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

[1] On 23 September 2010 the respondent filed an application for a minor civil dispute – minor debt in the Magistrates Court at Townsville claiming the sum of $4,308 for goods sold and delivered to the applicants. The applicants failed to file a response within the required time and an application was made for a decision by default.[1] Then, on 3 November 2010 an order was made that the applicants pay to the respondent the sum of $4,308.
[2] Rather than apply to have the decision by default set aside[2] the applicants filed an application for leave to appeal and appeal against that decision. On a perusal of the minor civil dispute file, it seems that the decision by default was regularly entered and no issue was taken by the applicants to the contrary.
[3] The grounds for the appeal in the application for leave to appeal or appeal simply state:

(a) Natural justice denied
(b) We would like a full and proper hearing into this matter

[4] The application or submissions do not attempt to identify any error in the entry of the decision by default or any other basis upon which the decision by default should be set aside.
[5] In written submissions the applicants state:
“When the default decision was made, it was based on our return documents being received after the due date. I genuinely question that it can take 6 days for documents to get from Roma to Townsville – we posted documents on 28 October 2010.”
[6] The implication for this is that the applicants did in fact prepare a response and forward it to the Court in Townsville but no such documents appear on the minor civil dispute file. Even if they did subsequent to the decision being made, it still would not constitute a basis upon which leave to appeal could be granted.
[7] Before the appeal can proceed to consider the substantive issues, leave of the Tribunal is necessary[3]. Leave will only be granted if there is some question of general importance or there is an arguable case of error on the primary decision. None of these matters apply here because as I’ve indicated, the appropriate remedy is to apply to have the decision by default set aside.
[8] As no error has been identified leave to appeal must be refused.

---

[1] Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, s 50.
[2] QCAT Act section 51.
[3] QCAT Act section 142(3).