Hayes v NSW Fair Trading [2013] NSWADT 240

Hayes v NSW Fair Trading [2013] NSWADT 240

The evidence provided by Mr Hayes, including that he was not and never became an employee or director of Perfect Pools and had no notification to the agency of acting as nominated supervisor, was sufficient to rebut the presumption created by the s 131 certificate. Therefore, Mr Hayes was not the nominated supervisor responsible for the defective work and was not guilty of improper conduct under s 51(1)(c) of the Home Building Act 1989.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Merits Review Before Administrative Decisions Tribunal
Outcome
Agency's disciplinary decision and penalty set aside
Legal Topics
['nominated Supervisor Obligations' 'statutory Warranties' 'improper Conduct Under Home Building Act']
['administrative Law' 'home Building Law'] ['nominated Supervisor Obligations' 'statutory Warranties' 'improper Conduct Under Home Building Act']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review / Merits Review Before Administrative Decisions Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Hayes was the nominated supervisor for Perfect Pools responsible for the supervision of the defective work at Bolwarra Heights' 'If so, whether he is guilty of improper conduct under s 51(1)(c) of the Home Building Act 1989' 'If there has been improper conduct, what penalty, if any, should be imposed']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence provided by Mr Hayes, including that he was not and never became an employee or director of Perfect Pools and had no notification to the agency of acting as nominated supervisor, was sufficient to rebut the presumption created by the s 131 certificate. Therefore, Mr Hayes was not the nominated supervisor responsible for the defective work and was not guilty of improper conduct under s 51(1)(c) of the Home Building Act 1989.

Court Disposition

Agency's disciplinary decision and penalty set aside

Orders

  • ['The decision of the Agency to take disciplinary action against Mr Hayes and to require him to pay a penalty of $1000 is set aside.']