Sande v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2017] NSWCATOD 55

Sande v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2017] NSWCATOD 55

The Tribunal found that Mr Sande knowingly submitted false qualification documents in 2003 and 2012, failed to disclose a prior cancellation and refusal, provided false information about the reason for cancellation, and gave untrue evidence to the Tribunal. This pattern of conduct seriously called into question his honesty and integrity, showed he lacked appreciation of the regulatory regime, and meant the Tribunal was not satisfied he was a fit and proper person to hold the contractor licence. The Commissioner's refusal was therefore the correct and preferable decision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of Refusal of a Contractor Licence in the Category of Carpenter Under the Home Building Act 1989 / Principal Judgment in the Occupational Division
Outcome
The decision under review is affirmed.
Legal Topics
['contractor Licence' 'fit and Proper Person' 'false Documents' 'non Disclosure of Information' 'honesty and Integrity']
['home Building Regulation' 'administrative Review' 'occupational Licensing'] ['contractor Licence' 'fit and Proper Person' 'false Documents' 'non Disclosure of Information' 'honesty and Integrity']

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 Review of Refusal of a Contractor Licence in the Category of Carpenter Under the Home Building Act 1989 / Principal Judgment in the Occupational Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant was a fit and proper person to hold a contractor licence under the Home Building Act 1989.' 'Whether the applicant submitted false qualification documents in 2003 and 2012.' 'Whether the applicant failed to disclose prior cancellation and refusal of a licence.' "Whether the Commissioner's refusal of the 2016 licence application was the correct and preferable decision."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that Mr Sande knowingly submitted false qualification documents in 2003 and 2012, failed to disclose a prior cancellation and refusal, provided false information about the reason for cancellation, and gave untrue evidence to the Tribunal. This pattern of conduct seriously called into question his honesty and integrity, showed he lacked appreciation of the regulatory regime, and meant the Tribunal was not satisfied he was a fit and proper person to hold the contractor licence. The Commissioner's refusal was therefore the correct and preferable decision.

Court Disposition

The decision under review is affirmed.

Orders

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