Bennett v Building Professionals Board (No 2) [2011] NSWADT 238

Bennett v Building Professionals Board (No 2) [2011] NSWADT 238

The development consent did not stipulate that the requirements of clause 8(c) were to be satisfied before the issue of any construction certificate, and did not clearly prohibit multiple construction certificates. The disciplinary finding of unsatisfactory professional conduct against Mr Bennett was not made out and should be set aside.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Review of Disciplinary Decision (administrative Law) / Tribunal Review – Principal Judgment
Outcome
Complaint dismissed; decision set aside
Legal Topics
['accredited Certifiers – Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'interpretation of Development Consent' 'statutory Construction' 'construction Certificate Requirements']
['administrative Law' 'planning and Environment Law' 'professional Regulation'] ['accredited Certifiers – Unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'interpretation of Development Consent' 'statutory Construction' 'construction Certificate Requirements']

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

Review of Disciplinary Decision (administrative Law) / Tribunal Review – Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the development consent stipulated that only one construction certificate be issued' 'Whether the applicant was required to ensure compliance with clause 8(c) prior to issuing the first construction certificate' 'Whether the applicant engaged in unsatisfactory professional conduct by contravening clause 146(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000']

Ratio Decidendi

The development consent did not stipulate that the requirements of clause 8(c) were to be satisfied before the issue of any construction certificate, and did not clearly prohibit multiple construction certificates. The disciplinary finding of unsatisfactory professional conduct against Mr Bennett was not made out and should be set aside.

Court Disposition

Complaint dismissed; decision set aside

Orders

  • ["The Respondent's decision of 22 April 2010, to reprimand the Applicant for unsatisfactory professional conduct, is set aside." "The complaint described as 'Additional Matter No. 1' is dismissed." 'Applications for a costs order are to be filed and served within 28 days; any replies within 28 days after; unless...