Sollazzo v Commissioner of Fair Trading [2015] NSWCATOD 20

Sollazzo v Commissioner of Fair Trading [2015] NSWCATOD 20

The Tribunal found that the applicant had at least two years' relevant industry experience: about 9-10 months with Mr Barnard, 7 months with Mr Pintos from December 2003 to June 2004, and 16 months with Mr Christie. Although the Barnard and Pintos work was somewhat limited, the Christie work was sufficiently broad, and there was no authority requiring a minimum duration within the two-year period for any particular type of work. Messrs Barnard and Pintos held qualifications in accordance with s.13 and provided adequate supervision, so the applicant was otherwise lawfully engaged. The Tribunal accepted that the applicant was an employee of Baltac in relation to the Christie work, or...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of Refusal of a Qualified Supervisor Certificate for the Category of General Building Work Under the Home Building Act 1989 / Review of Administrative Decision in the Occupational Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales
Outcome
The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review.
Legal Topics
['qualified Supervisor Certificate' 'relevant Industry Experience' 'general Building Work' 'supervision and Direction' 'otherwise Lawfully Engaged' 'employee Relationship']
['administrative Law' 'occupational Licensing' 'home Building Regulation'] ['qualified Supervisor Certificate' 'relevant Industry Experience' 'general Building Work' 'supervision and Direction' 'otherwise Lawfully Engaged' 'employee Relationship']

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

Application for Review of Refusal of a Qualified Supervisor Certificate for the Category of General Building Work Under the Home Building Act 1989 / Review of Administrative Decision in the Occupational Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant had at least two years' relevant industry experience in a wide range of building construction work." "Whether parts of the applicant's claimed experience could be counted where the supervising person was not licensed for the whole period." "Whether the applicant's experience was sufficiently broad in scope to amount to a wide range of building construction work." 'Whether the applicant was an employee or otherwise lawfully engaged by persons qualified to supervise him.' 'Whether the supervision provided by Messrs Barnard, Pintos and Christie was adequate for the purposes of the Instrument.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the applicant had at least two years' relevant industry experience: about 9-10 months with Mr Barnard, 7 months with Mr Pintos from December 2003 to June 2004, and 16 months with Mr Christie. Although the Barnard and Pintos work was somewhat limited, the Christie work was sufficiently broad, and there was no authority requiring a minimum duration within the two-year period for any particular type of work. Messrs Barnard and Pintos held qualifications in accordance with s.13 and provided adequate supervision, so the applicant was otherwise lawfully engaged. The Tribunal accepted that the applicant was an employee of Baltac in relation to the Christie work, or...

Court Disposition

The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review.

Orders

  • ['The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review.' "The Tribunal finds that the applicant had at least two years' relevant industry experience in a wide range of building construction work, obtained while he was either an employee or otherwise lawfully engaged by a person who qualified to supervise him."]