Anderson v Cameron [2016] NSWCATAP 173

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Anderson v Cameron [2016] NSWCATAP 173 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 27 July 2016 Decision date: 27 July 2016 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: S Higgins, Principal Member Decision: The respondent's application for costs is refused. Catchwords: COSTS – whether respondent has established special circumstances warranting an order for costs Legislation Cited: Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW) Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW) Category: Costs Parties: David Anderson (applicant) Paula Cameron and Robert Cameron (respondent) Representation: Counsel:

Solicitors: Appellant in person Jemmeson & Fisher Solicitors and Accountants for the respondent File Number(s): AP 16/03571 Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Date of Decision: 15 January 2016 Before: M Cohen, Senior Member File Number(s): RT 15/40779, RT 15/64236, RT 15/63766 and RT 15/50971

REASONS FOR DECISION 1. The respondent landlord, Mr and Mrs Cameron, seek an order that the appellant tenant, Mr Anderson, pay their costs of the appeal, which was dismissed by the Tribunal, constituted by Principal Member Redfern. The appellant's appeal was dismissed, on 25 February 2016, under subsection 55(1)(a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 as the appellant had advised, on 9 February 2016, that he did not wish to proceed with his appeal. Principal Member Redfern dismissed the appellant's appeal subject to respondent's application for costs. 2. Subsequent to making the orders on 25 February 2016, Principal Member Redfern was no longer able to hear and determine the respondents' application for costs as she had resigned. In light of this, on 13 April 2016, the Principal Registrar wrote to the parties to inform them of Principal Member Redfern's unavailability to hear and determine the respondent's cost application and that the President proposed to reconstitute the Appeal Panel by appointing me to replace Principal Member Redfern pursuant to subsection 52(2)(a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013. The parties were also invited to make any submissions on the proposed reconstitution by 26 April 2016. 3. On 15 April 2016, the respondents' solicitor wrote to the Registrar stating the respondents had no objection to the Tribunal following its own internal procedures. The solicitor also advised that on 25 February 2016, the Federal Circuit Court of Australia had made a sequestration order against the estate of the appellant under the Bankruptcy Act 1966. A copy of the order was enclosed and I note the order was stayed for a period of 21 days. The respondent's solicitor advised that the applicant for the sequestration order was a former landlord of the appellant and if an award of costs were to be made by the Tribunal "it would simply be lodged as a proof of debt with the Trustee in Bankruptcy." 4. The appellant has not responded to the Registrar's letter concerning the reconstitution of the Tribunal. 5. I note the stay of proceedings provisions in section 60 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966. In the absence of the parties informing the Tribunal otherwise, I have assumed the Federal Circuit Court has not made an order staying these proceedings. Accordingly, I have determined the respondents' application for costs on the papers that are before the Tribunal.