Chung v Conroy & Swanson [2013] QCAT 743

CITATION: Chung v Conroy & Swanson [2013] QCAT 743 PARTIES: Johnny Chow Yat Chung (Applicant) V Matthew Conroy Amy Swanson (Respondents) APPLICATION NUMBER: MCDT407-12 MATTER TYPE: Other minor civil dispute matters HEARING DATE: On the papers HEARD AT: Brisbane DECISION OF: Senior Member Stilgoe OAM DELIVERED ON: 28 May 2013 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane ORDERS MADE: 1. The application for correction of a decision is refused. CATCHWORDS: Minor civil dispute – residential tenancy matter APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any): The tribunal heard and determined this matter on the papers in accordance with section 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld). REASONS FOR DECISION [1] On 13 July 2013, the tribunal ordered the Residential Tenancy Authority to pay the rental bond $400 to Mr Chung and the balance to the respondent. [2] Mr Conroy and Ms Swanson applied to correct that order because, they say, the learned Adjudicator incorrectly calculated the amounts and did not take into account money that Mr Chung held. [3] Mr Conroy and Ms Swanson’s application is not really an application to correct a decision. It is not a clerical mistake, or an error arising from an accidental slip or omission.1 Even though Mr Conroy and Ms Swanson say 1 Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 135(1)(a), (b). -- 1 of 2 -- 2 it is a miscalculation2, it is not simply an error in the calculation of the figures. Mr Conroy and Ms Swanson claim that it is an error of fact and evidence. [4] Therefore, Mr Conroy and Ms Swanson are really asking the tribunal for leave to appeal the learned Adjudicator’s decision. If they file an application to that effect, the tribunal will then consider whether the learned Adjudicator’s decision should stand. 2 Ibid s 135(1)(c). -- 2 of 2 --