CITATION:	Briridge Pty Ltd t/as Civic Video Springfield
v Carter Hall Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] QCAT 533	

PARTIES:	Briridge Pty Ltd t/as Civic Video Springfield
(Applicant)
v
Carter Hall Holdings Pty Ltd
(Respondent)	

APPLICATION NUMBER:	RSL043-13	

MATTER TYPE:	Retail shop leases matters	

HEARING DATE:	14 October 2013	

HEARD AT:	Brisbane	

DECISION OF:	James White, Member	

DELIVERED ON:	14 October 2013	

DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane	

ORDERS MADE:	1.	Application to Strike Out is dismissed.	

CATCHWORDS:	Application to Strike Out – Abuse of Process – where previous Notice of Dispute was withdrawn.	

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION: 

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]	The Applicant for strike out is Charter Hall Holdings Pty Ltd, the Respondent to the current proceedings, RSL 034-11. The sole ground of the application is that Briridge Pty Ltd, the Applicant to the current proceedings, previously filed a Notice of Dispute, RSL 006-11 which was subsequently withdrawn. Charter Hall submits that the current proceedings are an abuse of process.

[2]	In respect to the previous proceedings RSL 006-11, it is noted that Senior Member Kerrie O’Callaghan, directed, “the Notice of Dispute is withdrawn”.

[3]	The Tribunal did not determine the matter and there were no findings or reasons given. The Notice of Dispute did not eventuate in a final hearing. It was, on the face of it, simply withdrawn.

[4]	To be an abuse of process, the Notice of Dispute would need to be a frivolous or vexatious action or had been already decided by a competent court. The current proceedings do not constitute a rehearing of the previous proceedings, as there was no final hearing or determination in the previous proceedings. 

[5]	There are substantive issues to be determined, including but not limited to questions relating to audit reports, outgoings and advertising costs.

[6]	It is clear to me that the current proceedings are not an abuse of process.

[7]	Accordingly, the Application is dismissed.