Punch Up in NQ & QCAT rules - Qld Gallops - Racehorse TALK   harm-plan

Racehorse TALK

Punch Up in NQ & QCAT rules - Qld Gallops - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Punch Up in NQ & QCAT rules  (Read 637 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Arsenal

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 194
  • Posts: 15808
O.P. « 2017-Mar-29, 08:04 AM »
A punch up after the races in 2015 between a 70yo bookies clerk and a bookie who were former friends but fell out resulted in the now defunct RDB penalising Mr Bode the clerk who exercised his rights in taking his case to QCAT which set aside the RDB decision......he sought costs but wasn't successful as the QCAT general rule is that each party bears its own costs.

A lengthy and expensive exercise......mainly due to the failure of the RDB to give Bode natural justice.

ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW – principles applied – fresh hearing on the merits – racing – natural justice principles – rules of evidence – fresh evidence – allegations of misconduct, improper conduct and unseemly conduct – physical altercation between persons involved in the racing industry – whether defence of self defence should be accepted – conflicting evidence – denial of natural justice – independent witness not made available for cross-examination – undue weight placed upon a written statement


PROCEDURE – COSTS – DISCRETION TO ORDER COSTS – principles applied – presumption is that each party must bear the party’s own costs – rebuttal of legislative presumption only if in the interests of justice – must be sufficiently compelling grounds to depart from legislative presumption – in the interests of justice phrase is subjective and may vary depending on the facts, circumstances and the parties involved – award of costs is an exception rather than a rule – where Tribunal set aside a decision – natural justice – where a party acted without fairness – where party failed to make available a witness for cross examination but that conduct did not unnecessarily disadvantage the other party – decision maker must use best endeavours to assist the Tribunal – Tribunal’s power to require witnesses to attend – factors to be taken into account –Tribunal undertaking a detailed assessment of the dispute is not enough to rebut presumption to award costs –disparity in financial resources between the parties – circumstances and facts not complex in nature – Applicant’s genuine attempts to enable and help the decision maker to make a decision on the merits


Giddy Up :beer: