Keating v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2009] NSWADT 16

Keating v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2009] NSWADT 16

Mr Keating did not provide referee statements or evidence compliant with the practical experience requirements—specifically, 12 months' wiring installation experience verified by suitably qualified supervisors—as required by the Commissioner's standards. The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to review the standard itself,...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law—licensing Review / Final Merits Decision After Hearing
Outcome
The decision under review is affirmed.
Legal Topics
['review of Licensing Decision' 'contractor Licence Requirements' 'home Building Act Jurisdictional Limits']
['administrative Law' 'licensing Law'] ['review of Licensing Decision' 'contractor Licence Requirements' 'home Building Act Jurisdictional Limits']

Source-derived case record

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 Law—licensing Review / Final Merits Decision After Hearing

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Keating satisfied the practical experience requirements for a contractor licence as an electrician under relevant standards' 'Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to review the standards set by the Commissioner']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Keating did not provide referee statements or evidence compliant with the practical experience requirements—specifically, 12 months' wiring installation experience verified by suitably qualified supervisors—as required by the Commissioner's standards. The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to review the standard itself, and thus the refusal of his application was correct.

Court Disposition

The decision under review is affirmed.

Orders

  • ['The decision under review is affirmed.']