Joel v Commissioner for Fair Trading (No 2) [2021] NSWCATAP 304

Joel v Commissioner for Fair Trading (No 2) [2021] NSWCATAP 304

The Appellant did not demonstrate any error of law, material factual error, denial of procedural fairness, or basis for leave to appeal. The Tribunal's findings were open on the evidence before it, and the further or additional evidence was either already before the Tribunal, reasonably available at the time, incapable of advancing the appeal, or unlikely to have produced a different result. The Tribunal was entitled to conclude that sufficient time had not elapsed to ignore the dishonesty offences and to affirm the refusal of the licence application.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Tribunal Decision Affirming Internal Review Refusing Application for Class 2 Real Estate Agent's Licence / Appeal Panel Decision
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['question of Law Appeal' 'leave to Appeal' 'disqualified Person' 'dishonesty Offences' 'further or Additional Evidence' 'exercise of Discretion']
['administrative Law' 'occupational Licensing' 'real Estate Agents' 'civil and Administrative Tribunal Appeals'] ['question of Law Appeal' 'leave to Appeal' 'disqualified Person' 'dishonesty Offences' 'further or Additional Evidence' 'exercise of Discretion']

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

Appeal Against Tribunal Decision Affirming Internal Review Refusing Application for Class 2 Real Estate Agent's Licence / Appeal Panel Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Tribunal erred in law in affirming the refusal of the Appellant's application for a Class 2 Real Estate Agent's Licence." 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted on grounds other than a question of law.' 'Whether further or additional evidence sought to be relied upon by the Appellant should be received on appeal.' "Whether the Appellant's dishonesty offences should be ignored under s 16(2) of the Property and Stock Agents Act 2002 because of the time elapsed or triviality of the acts."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Appellant did not demonstrate any error of law, material factual error, denial of procedural fairness, or basis for leave to appeal. The Tribunal's findings were open on the evidence before it, and the further or additional evidence was either already before the Tribunal, reasonably available at the time, incapable of advancing the appeal, or unlikely to have produced a different result. The Tribunal was entitled to conclude that sufficient time had not elapsed to ignore the dishonesty offences and to affirm the refusal of the licence application.

Court Disposition

The appeal is dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.']