Stricke v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2017] NSWCATOD 100

Stricke v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2017] NSWCATOD 100

The applicant, by still serving a sentence under parole for serious indictable offences related to dishonesty and drug supply, has not demonstrated that he is presently a fit and proper person to hold a real estate agent's licence; current rehabilitation and positive behaviour are recognised but do not outweigh the protective function and public confidence required during the parole period.

Parties
Applicant: Max Sheldon Stricke; Respondent: Commissioner for Fair Trading
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review / Final Determination
Outcome
Affirmed—application refused
Legal Topics
Fit and Proper Person, Real Estate Agent Licensing, Parole and Criminal Convictions
Administrative Law Occupational Licensing Fit and Proper Person Real Estate Agent Licensing Parole and Criminal Convictions

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Max Sheldon Stricke

Applicant

Commissioner for Fair Trading

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Administrative Review / Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is a fit and proper person to hold a real estate agent's licence under the Property Stock and Business Agents Act 2002

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant, by still serving a sentence under parole for serious indictable offences related to dishonesty and drug supply, has not demonstrated that he is presently a fit and proper person to hold a real estate agent's licence; current rehabilitation and positive behaviour are recognised but do not outweigh the protective function and public confidence required during the parole period.

Court Disposition

Affirmed—application refused

Orders

  • The Respondent's decision to refuse the applicant's application for a real estate agent's licence is affirmed.