Jesiolowski v Department of Customer Service: Building Commission NSW [2024] NSWCATOD 72

Jesiolowski v Department of Customer Service: Building Commission NSW [2024] NSWCATOD 72

The Applicant held the required qualifications and endorsement, was a qualified mechanical tradesperson, and his proposed disconnection and reconnection work on like-for-like replacement motors was incidental to his principal work maintaining asphalt production facilities. The Tribunal accepted that the Applicant's use of the word "and" in describing disconnection and reconnection of electrical wiring "and" the motor was a typographical error for "at", and found the proposed work consistent with the scope of disconnection and reconnection work in the gazetted Instrument. The correct and preferable decision was therefore to set aside the refusal and issue the certificate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Refusal of Qualified Supervisor Certificate / Final Decision
Outcome
The Decision under review was set aside and a Qualified Supervisor Certificate was ordered to be issued to the Applicant.
Legal Topics
['qualified Supervisor Certificate' 'disconnection and Reconnection of Fixed Electrical Equipment' 'correct and Preferable Decision' 'scope of Specialist Work']
['administrative Law' 'occupational Licensing' 'home Building Regulation'] ['qualified Supervisor Certificate' 'disconnection and Reconnection of Fixed Electrical Equipment' 'correct and Preferable Decision' 'scope of Specialist Work']

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 of Refusal of Qualified Supervisor Certificate / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the correct and preferable decision was to affirm or set aside the refusal of the Applicant's application for a qualified supervisor certificate in the specialist category of disconnection and reconnection of fixed electrical equipment (appliances and motors)." 'Whether the Applicant satisfied the qualification, experience and capability requirements for the certificate under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) and the gazetted qualification requirements.' 'Whether the work the Applicant proposed to perform was within the scope of disconnection and reconnection work and incidental to his principal function in the workplace.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Applicant held the required qualifications and endorsement, was a qualified mechanical tradesperson, and his proposed disconnection and reconnection work on like-for-like replacement motors was incidental to his principal work maintaining asphalt production facilities. The Tribunal accepted that the Applicant's use of the word "and" in describing disconnection and reconnection of electrical wiring "and" the motor was a typographical error for "at", and found the proposed work consistent with the scope of disconnection and reconnection work in the gazetted Instrument. The correct and preferable decision was therefore to set aside the refusal and issue the certificate.

Court Disposition

The Decision under review was set aside and a Qualified Supervisor Certificate was ordered to be issued to the Applicant.

Orders

  • ['The Decision under review is set aside.' 'A Qualified Supervisor Certificate in the specialist category of disconnection and reconnection of fixed electrical equipment (appliances and motors) is to be issued to the Applicant under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW).']