Building Professionals Board v Cogo [2008] NSWADT 119

Building Professionals Board v Cogo [2008] NSWADT 119

The respondent issued a construction certificate approving numerous and significant variations from the development consent plans, including radical changes to car parking amenity, removal of the concourse, cramping of entry foyers, replacement of the swimming pool, and altered storage arrangements. Despite limited guidance available in 2001 and some contact with Council officers, a reasonably competent accredited certifier would have recognised that the variations required a s 96 modification application. The conduct therefore amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct, but given the early stage of the private certification scheme, the respondent's Grade 2 accreditation at the time,...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Disciplinary Application Against an Accredited Certifier Under the Building Professionals Act 2005 / Hearing and Determination of Principal Matter
Outcome
The respondent was found guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct, reprimanded, and ordered to pay the Board a fine of $11,000.
Legal Topics
['unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'professional Misconduct' 'construction Certificates' 'accredited Certifiers' 'consistency With Development Consent' 'section 96 Modification Applications']
['administrative Law' 'professional Discipline' 'planning and Development' 'building Certification'] ['unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'professional Misconduct' 'construction Certificates' 'accredited Certifiers' 'consistency With Development Consent' 'section 96 Modification Applications']

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

Disciplinary Application Against an Accredited Certifier Under the Building Professionals Act 2005 / Hearing and Determination of Principal Matter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the respondent breached cl 145(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 by issuing a construction certificate for plans not inconsistent with the development consent.' "Whether the respondent's conduct amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct." 'What disciplinary orders should be made.']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent issued a construction certificate approving numerous and significant variations from the development consent plans, including radical changes to car parking amenity, removal of the concourse, cramping of entry foyers, replacement of the swimming pool, and altered storage arrangements. Despite limited guidance available in 2001 and some contact with Council officers, a reasonably competent accredited certifier would have recognised that the variations required a s 96 modification application. The conduct therefore amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct, but given the early stage of the private certification scheme, the respondent's Grade 2 accreditation at the time,...

Court Disposition

The respondent was found guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct, reprimanded, and ordered to pay the Board a fine of $11,000.

Orders

  • ['The Tribunal finds the Respondent guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct.' 'The Tribunal orders that the Respondent be reprimanded; and pay to the Board a fine of $11,000.']