Belot v Independent Assessor & Anor [2024] QCAT 445

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CITATION: Belot v Independent Assessor & Anor [2024] QCAT 445 PARTIES: ADAM JOHN BELOT (applicant) v THE INDEPENDENT ASSESSOR (respondent) COUNCILLOR CONDUCT TRIBUNAL (respondent) APPLICATION NO/S: GAR702 of 2021 MATTER TYPE: Local Government DELIVERED ON: 17 October 2024 HEARING DATE: On the papers HEARD AT: Brisbane DECISION OF: Judicial Member Forrest SC ORDERS: 1. The parties are permitted to rely upon the written statement of Mr Gregory John Chemello dated 31 May 2023. 2. Mr Gregory John Chemello is excused from any further participation in these proceedings, including any cross-examination, in relation to his statement of 31 May 2023. 3. The matter is to be listed for further directions to set the matter for final hearing at a time and on a date to be fixed. CATCHWORDS: PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS - MOTIONS, INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS AND OTHER PRE-TRIAL MATTERS – OTHER MATTERS – where the First respondent filed a statement by an expert witness - where the expert witness requested to withdraw from the proceeding after being appointed as a Casual Member of the Second Respondent – where the expert witness had filed a statement in the matter - where both parties consent that the expert witness statement remains as evidence in the substantive proceedings – whether the Tribunal should allow parties to rely on the expert witness statement -- 1 of 2 -- 2 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) REASONS FOR DECISION [1] For determination in substantive proceedings reviewing a decision of the Second Respondent, the First Respondent has sought some interim directions. These are being determined by consent on the papers. [2] On 31 May, 2023, the First Respondent, filed a statement by an expert witness, Mr Gregory John Chemello, dated 31 May, 2023. On 17 November, 2023, Mr Chemello advised the First Respondent that he had since been appointed on 1 November, 2023 as a Casual Member of the Second Respondent and that he was consequently ‘withdrawing’ from this matter. [3] The First Respondent agreed that it was appropriate for Mr Chemello to no longer participate in these proceedings. However, as the First Respondent and the Applicant have each already filed written submissions addressing the substantive issues in the proceedings, including referencing Mr Chemello’s statement, the First Respondent seeks directions that Mr Chemello’s witness statement remain in evidence in the substantive proceedings, notwithstanding that he will not be able to be cross-examined by any of the parties. [4] The Tribunal has been advised that the Applicant consents to the proposed directions and that the Second Respondent will abide the directions if made by the Tribunal as proposed, neither consenting to them or opposing them. [5] Prior to the consideration of this interim application, I caused the parties to be notified that Mr Chemello is known to me professionally, in that I served with him on an independent statutory board for a few years until that board was legislatively abolished recently. I do not consider that prevents me from being able to decide this decide this matter impartially. The parties were invited to make any objection to my continuing to hear and determine this matter in these circumstances and none were forthcoming. [6] In these circumstances, I make the directions that are set out at the commencement of these reasons, including setting the matter for a further directions’ hearing at a time and date to be fixed. -- 2 of 2 --