Dixonbuild Pty Ltd v Live & Local Pty Ltd [2013] QCAT 673
CITATION: Dixonbuild Pty Ltd v Live & Local Pty Ltd [2013]
QCAT 673
PARTIES: Dixonbuild Pty Ltd
(Applicant)
v
Live & Local Pty Ltd
(Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER: MCDO1762-13
MATTER TYPE: Other minor civil dispute matter
HEARING DATE: On the papers
HEARD AT: Brisbane
DECISION OF: Adjudicator Bertelsen
DELIVERED ON: 29 November 2013
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
ORDERS MADE: 1. The application for default decision is
refused.
2. The application is accepted as a trader
claim and is to be set down for hearing
promptly.
CATCHWORDS: Debt for the purpose of a default decision –
characteristics of a debt – Tribunal’s approach
to characterising a sum of money as a debt –
application as a consumer claim not a debt
claim.
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act).
REASONS FOR DECISION
[1] By application for minor civil dispute – minor debt filed 30 August 2013 the
applicant Dixonbuild Pty Ltd (Dixonbuild) seeks a refund of $990.00 paid
to the respondent Live & Local Pty Ltd (Live & Local) for the provision of
an exhibitor stand at an exhibition event to be arranged by the respondent
Live & Local. Dixonbuild asserts that due to a lack of interest the
-- 1 of 3 --
2
exhibition was subsequently cancelled but that the respondent has
refused to refund, despite request, the $990.00 paid.
Background and evidence
[2] In April 2013 Dixonbuild paid in advance for an exhibitor stand at the
Logan Live & Local expo scheduled for 19 through 22 June 2013. The
expo did not take place due to apparent lack of support from Logan City
Council, Logan Chamber of Commerce and local media. Subsequently
Live & Local has failed to refund the $990.00 paid. Dixonbuild has
claimed for a debt owing and seeks a default decision.
Conclusions
[3] Section 12 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009
(QCAT Act) lists the types of applications that the Tribunal may entertain
in its minor civil dispute jurisdiction. This section includes a debt or
liquidated demand to $25,000.00 as well as claims arising out of a
contract between a consumer and a trader and a claim arising out of a
contract between 2 or more traders. Other types of applications that may
be entertained pursuant to section 12 are not relevant here.
[4] Schedule 3 of the QCAT Act describes a minor civil debt, amongst other
things, as “a claim to recover a debt or liquidated demand of money, with
or without interest, of up to the prescribed amount ($25,000.00)”.
[5] A debt or liquidated demand has been described as a sum of money that
can be calculated by reference to a formula schedule or some other
yardstick by which the debt or sum payable can be readily calculated.
Whilst here it could be argued that the sum of money being paid on
account of the provision of an exhibitor stand is a specific sum of money it
was never paid in the first instance as a sum repayable; rather it was paid
for the provision of a service, a space at an expo, which never
eventuated/was never performed.
[6] The fact that the service was never performed does not turn the sum paid
into a debt owing as, for instance, pursuant to a loan agreement; rather it
is asserted as the right to a refund for non performance of a service.
[7] Whilst the application has been filed as an application for a minor debt the
Tribunal has the discretion to accept at this point the application as a
trader claim rather than a minor civil debt. The Tribunal considers the
applicants Dixonbuild claim to be a trader claim in terms of the QCAT Act.
That being so this application ought properly proceed as an application for
minor civil dispute – trader claim. Being under the threshold that
necessitates mediation prior to hearing this claim can now be set down
directly for hearing promptly.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
Orders
[8] The application for default decision is refused.
[9] The application is accepted as a trader claim and is to be set down for
hearing promptly.
-- 3 of 3 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QCAT/2013/673