Broadbent v Medical Board of Australia [2025] QCAT 412

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CITATION: Broadbent v Medical Board of Australia [2025] QCAT 412 PARTIES: MICHAEL RUSSELL MARK BROADBENT (applicant) v MEDICAL BOARD OF AUSTRALIA (respondent) APPLICATION NO/S: REO015-25 MATTER TYPE: Occupational regulation matters DELIVERED ON: 17 November 2025 HEARING DATE: On the papers HEARD AT: Brisbane DECISION OF: Judge Dann, Deputy President ORDERS: IT IS THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL THAT: The Tribunal directs the Principal Registrar to reject the application for reopening. CATCHWORDS: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – where the Principal Registrar rejected the practitioner’s application to reopen a proceeding – where the practitioner requested that decision be referred to the Tribunal for review – where the Principal Registrar refers the decision to reject to the Tribunal – whether there are grounds for rejecting the application pursuant to the QCAT Act – whether the Tribunal should direct the Principal Registrar to reject the application Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION: This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) -- 1 of 2 -- 2 REASONS FOR DECISION Relief sought [1] By letter dated 22 August 2025, pursuant to s 35(3) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (‘QCAT Act’), a delegate of the Principal Registrar of the Tribunal rejected the practitioner’s application to reopen a proceeding filed in the Tribunal on 22 May 2025. The delegate acted because the application did not comply with the QCAT Act, an enabling Act or the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2009 (Qld) (‘QCAT Rules’). [2] By application received on 12 September 2025 pursuant to s 35(4)(a) of the QCAT Act, the applicant practitioner made a request to have this decision referred to the Tribunal for review. [3] Pursuant to s 35(4)(b) of the QCAT Act, the Principal Registrar of the Tribunal has referred the practitioner’s application of the decision to reject his application to the Tribunal. [4] On review, pursuant to s 35(6) of the QCAT Act, the Tribunal must direct the Principal Registrar to: (a) reject the application; or (b) accept the application on stated conditions or no conditions. [5] The Tribunal may direct the Principal Registrar to reject an application only if a ground for rejecting the application under s 35(3) of the QCAT Act exists. Basis for rejecting the application [6] In the affidavit filed with the application to reopen on 22 May 2025, the applicant says: I apply to the Tribunal for the proceedings of CA 7059/10 to be reopened… [7] The case number quoted by the applicant is for a Court of Appeal matter in which the applicant was seeking leave to appeal from the decision of the Tribunal. In December 2010, the Court of Appeal delivered its judgment and in doing so, refused the practitioner’s application for leave to appeal with a costs order made against him. [8] There is a ground for rejecting the application under s 35(3) of the QCAT Act, which is that it does not comply with the QCAT Act. [9] This is because the QCAT Act expressly provides in s 138(5) that a party cannot make an application under s 138 in relation to a decision the subject of an appeal or an application for leave to appeal under Part 8. Section 138(6) provides that this is so whether or not the appeal or application has been decided. The QCAT Act does not permit the applicant to reopen a Court of Appeal matter in the Tribunal. [10] The Tribunal directs the Principal Registrar to reject the application for reopening. -- 2 of 2 --