Lando v Department of Services Technology & Administration [2010] NSWADT 181

Lando v Department of Services Technology & Administration [2010] NSWADT 181

Although the adverse findings concerning the CTTT order, false declaration and fitness were not made out, the applicant did not meet the current qualification requirements determined by the Commissioner for the Building contractor licence. His former licences had expired more than two years before the new...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 June 2010
Procedural Posture
External Review of Refusal of an Application for an Individual Contractor Licence in the Category of Building / Hearing and Written Reasons Following Extempore Decision
Outcome
The decision under review was affirmed.
Legal Topics
['issue of Contractor Licence' 'qualification Requirements' 'fit and Proper Person' 'unsatisfied Tribunal Order' 'bankruptcy']
['administrative Law' 'home Building Licensing'] ['issue of Contractor Licence' 'qualification Requirements' 'fit and Proper Person' 'unsatisfied Tribunal Order' 'bankruptcy']

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

External Review of Refusal of an Application for an Individual Contractor Licence in the Category of Building / Hearing and Written Reasons Following Extempore Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant met the qualification requirements for a contractor licence in the category of Building.' 'Whether the applicant was subject to an unsatisfied Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal order within the meaning of the Home Building Regulation 2004.' 'Whether the applicant made a false declaration about an unsatisfied Tribunal or Court order.' 'Whether the applicant was a fit and proper person to hold a contractor licence.' 'Whether the decision refusing the licence should be affirmed.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the adverse findings concerning the CTTT order, false declaration and fitness were not made out, the applicant did not meet the current qualification requirements determined by the Commissioner for the Building contractor licence. His former licences had expired more than two years before the new application, so he could not rely on the transitional acceptance of a previous licence, and the Tribunal could not review the standards set by the Commissioner. The application therefore had to be refused and the correct and preferable decision was to affirm the determination.

Court Disposition

The decision under review was affirmed.

Orders

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