Do v Commissioner of Fair Trading [2016] NSWCATOD 79

Do v Commissioner of Fair Trading [2016] NSWCATOD 79

The applicant did not provide a satisfactory explanation for a lengthy delay. No reasonable basis existed for his belief that proceedings were stayed. The merits of his case were very poor as his conduct was serious and recent, and he remained a disqualified person by virtue of his conviction for an offence involving dishonesty within the last 10 years. Accordingly, the criteria for granting an extension of time under s 41 of the CAT Act were not satisfied.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Administrative Review / Extension of Time / Determination on Application for Extension of Time to File Review Out of Time
Outcome
Extension of time refused
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'fit and Proper Person' 'disqualification' 'offence Involving Dishonesty']
['administrative Law' 'real Estate and Licensing'] ['extension of Time' 'fit and Proper Person' 'disqualification' 'offence Involving Dishonesty']

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

Application for Administrative Review / Extension of Time / Determination on Application for Extension of Time to File Review Out of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether extension of time to apply for review should be granted under s 41 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013' 'Whether applicant provided satisfactory explanation for delay' 'Whether applicant is a fit and proper person and not disqualified under s 14 and s 16 Property, Stock and Business Agents Act 2002']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not provide a satisfactory explanation for a lengthy delay. No reasonable basis existed for his belief that proceedings were stayed. The merits of his case were very poor as his conduct was serious and recent, and he remained a disqualified person by virtue of his conviction for an offence involving dishonesty within the last 10 years. Accordingly, the criteria for granting an extension of time under s 41 of the CAT Act were not satisfied.

Court Disposition

Extension of time refused

Orders

  • ['Extension of time under s 41 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 refused.']