Leave to appeal refused: $10,000 family loan repayment order stands (QCAT, 2026)

What happened

A mother lent her son $10,000. She later brought a claim in QCAT as a minor civil dispute (a small civil claim, heard in QCAT's simplest and least formal process) to get the money back.

The son accepted that the money had started out as a loan. His case was that at some point it changed character and became a gift, so he no longer had to repay it. The claim was heard on 9 October 2024 by a magistrate sitting as a member of QCAT.

The magistrate was not satisfied with the evidence the son had put forward. The magistrate found the more likely course of events was that the son had not proved the money was no longer repayable. Having accepted the sum was a loan to begin with, the son had not discharged the burden of showing it had become a gift. The magistrate ordered him to repay his mother $10,000.

On 18 October 2024, about two to three weeks after that hearing, the son filed an application for leave to appeal to QCAT's Appeal Tribunal. The ground stated in his application was that he wanted the case reopened so that he and three other witnesses could give more detail, by affidavit, about the times, places and locations where his mother had told them she was gifting him the money.

What each side wanted

The son asked the Appeal Tribunal for permission to appeal and to reopen the case so that he and three further witnesses could give additional evidence that the money had been a gift. His mother opposed the application and was represented at the appeal hearing by Women's Legal Service. The Appeal Tribunal treated the application as a request to run the hearing again on evidence the son was seeking to add after the event.

What the tribunal decided

The Appeal Tribunal dismissed the application for leave to appeal filed on 18 October 2024. The order was: "The application for leave to appeal filed on 18 October 2024 is dismissed."

Because leave was refused, the appeal could not go any further. The magistrate's order that the son repay his mother $10,000 was left standing. The Appeal Tribunal made no new money order and the decision as published records no order about costs.

Why the tribunal decided it that way

Section 142 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) lets a party appeal to the Appeal Tribunal where the original decision was not made by a judicial member. That condition was met here. But section 142(3) adds a filter: for a decision in a minor civil dispute, and for an appeal on a question of fact or of mixed law and fact, the party must first get the Appeal Tribunal's leave (its permission) to appeal. Both parts applied, so the son needed leave before any appeal could run.

In deciding whether to grant leave, the Appeal Tribunal looked at the nature of the argument and at the material the son proposed to rely on. What he was really seeking was to put forward new evidence: evidence he could have obtained, in a proper and admissible form, before the hearing on 9 October 2024. The witnesses he wanted to call had been available for the original hearing.

The Appeal Tribunal said it was up to the son to advance his best case at the first hearing. An appeal is not a casual chance at a second attempt just because a party is unhappy with how the first hearing went. There are proper mechanisms and exceptions to that general position, which is why leave is required and why the proposed argument and evidence are examined. Having considered the material, the Appeal Tribunal was not satisfied that leave should be granted, so it refused leave and dismissed the application.

What this means if you are in a similar position

If you are in a similar position, this decision shows how two rules work together in QCAT. First, in a dispute about money that was handed over, the starting point matters: once it is accepted that money was a loan, the person who says it later became a gift carries the job of proving that. The tribunal decides on the evidence actually before it at the hearing, and on what it finds more likely than not.

Second, an appeal from a minor civil dispute is not automatic and is not a fresh hearing. Leave to appeal is needed, and the Appeal Tribunal looks at whether the material being offered is genuinely new or is simply evidence that could have been gathered and presented the first time. Where the witnesses were available for the original hearing, that is a point against granting leave. In practice this means the first hearing is usually the one that counts.

For a family loan that has not been repaid, the step most people take first is a written request or demand for repayment that sets out the amount, the date it was lent and the terms, before any tribunal application is filed.

How to apply: our step-by-step guide to a QCAT application. More decisions: QCAT cases and unpaid debts and invoices.

Source: Tomlinson v Moore [2026] QCATA 76 (read the full decision). This summary was prepared from the published decision for general information. It is not legal advice, and the tribunal’s own reasons are the authoritative record.