Australia's #1 for Law

Join 150,000 Australians every month. Ask a question, respond to a question and better understand the law today!

QLD QCAT Issue - Potential Miscarriage of Justice?

Discussion in 'Other/General Law Forum' started by corazon, 1 September 2015.

  1. corazon

    corazon Member

    19 June 2015
    Likes Received:
    I am begging for legal advice from a lawyer. I am victim of injustice, retaliation, falsely accused of perjury, miscarriage of justice by tribunal.

    During my hearing, all my sworn evidence, sworn testimony was rejected by tribunal without proof of perjury and without respondent. The reason is because months before the hearing, I made formal complaints against the tribunal as the tribunal rejected my sworn testimony without proof of perjury. So its retaliation is the reason of the hostility, rejection of everything I testified and dismissal of my case base on RTA rules not QCAT which is very unfair, especially as I testified that i did not apply in RTA and tribunal work in QCAT not RTA and as all QCAT hearing are recorded so I cannot lie.

    So as I was treated the opposite of the conduct that QCAT advertise including the role of tribunal, as tribunal role that is in QCAT website to resolve disputed not rejected sworn evidence,nor dismissed a case so tribunal who handle my hearing did not do the role and conduct that QCAT advertised and by doing that tribunal committed an offence which is false,misleading representation, information , as rule of law below emphasize that we equal and that law is applied equall and fairly, so anyone committed offence should be hold accountable in which rule of law organisation agreed which is in my facebook below I also justified to Attorney General that tribunal also committed perjjury by making a fasely statement by falsely accussed me of perjury by rejected my sworn testimony without proof of perjury and without respondent present I did prove to attorney general that tribunal being independent is unlawful which i did base on the speech of Judge Garry Downes and the website is below.

    I also justified that as, Justice Garry Downes is President and Judge of Administrative and his speech about tribunal role and responsibility which is above, is base on fact and cannot be disputed and as Justice Garry Downes never mentioned that tribunal should be independent so tribunal being independent should be considered unlawful and as all QCAT hearing are recorded, so all the injustice and offences that the tribunal did during my hearing cannot be disputed.

    I also submitted a email from a law professor to the attorney general, which stated that everyone is considered subject to the law, but unless an Act or or case says it is unlawful to do something, there is nothing that can be done outside of this. If someone commits an offence, or otherwise operates in an unlawful manner, then obviously a person may have a cause of action against them. . . So tribunal, President of QCAT, former attorney General all committed an offence as they did not do their role and conduct so a false, misleading information representation is committed by them which is punishable by penalty.

    I also justified to attorney general that as retaliation is the reason for the rejection of all my sworn evidence and sworn testimony and dismissed my case, so tribunal deliberately committed a false ,statement by rejection of all my sworn evidence and sworn testimony withour proof of perjury , without respondent present,which respondent is the only person who can reject my sworn evidence as respondent is the one who signed the rent agreement and not tribunal so when tribunal rejected my sworn testimony, tribunal deliberately made a false decision by dismissed my case base RTA rules which should not be used to dismissed my case because as i testified during the hearing that I did not apply in RTA as I was not qualified so RTA rules should not be used to dismissed my case

    As Section 216 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 makes it an offence for a person to knowingly give the registry documents containing false or misleading information. and the Maximum penalty for such an offence – section 216 should also be use to tribunal who deliberately give a false statement, false decision because to deliberately to make a a false statement,and false decision, is the same as deliberately giving false testimony and false information.

    As the rule of law is applied, fairly so that no one is above the law.

    Does that mean anyone committed an offence such as perjury and anyone committed unlawful law like false and misleading advertisement be hold accountable which by law are punishable by penalty? Is any law that contradicted the rule of law which emphasize fair and equally considered unlawful?

    Below is Rule of Law Institute of Australia response:
    The answer to your first question is yes. Your second question - there is nothing to prevent the Australian Parliament from passing laws which are against the rule of law. But the High Court can strike down laws which are unconstitutional.

    With the evidence that i mentioned here, will attorney General give me justice and do i have a case, I really need a lawyer opinion?

    I apologise for my long message
  2. praxidice

    praxidice Well-Known Member

    30 May 2014
    Likes Received:
    I'm not a lawyer but I've probably had more experience with the kangaroo court than most of them. Few lawyers are prepared to mess with QCAT as the processes are so ridiculously convoluted and decisions more often than not nonsensical. Furthermore lawyers are only permitted to attend in very special situations (ie when the client, or more accurately the victim, has a communication or capacity issue). Mind you there is no restriction on legal counsel from government departments and quangos

    The main problem I've encountered is that QCAT rarely if ever observes any legislation and isn't accountable to anyone including the Attorney General and the Premier. My impression is that a certain senior member rules the roost although its unclear why. In any case the president (a supreme court judge) is ineffectual and is likely to be more so in the future since Tim Carmody is angling for the position. Will tell you more later when I have a few minutes spare.

Share This Page