Doyle v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2022] NSWCATOD 175
The Tribunal found that the applicant had demonstrated at least two years' relevant building experience across referenced residential and commercial projects, as evidenced by referee statements and letters, and that the Tribunal could deal with the application under s55(6) of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 to protect the applicant's interests. The applicant satisfied the requirements under the Home Building Act 1989 for an individual endorsed contractor licence.
- Parties
- Applicant: Scott Andrew Doyle; Respondent: Commissioner for Fair Trading
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 04 March 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Administrative Review / Final Judgment
- Legal Topics
- Home Building Act, Contractor Licensing, Tribunal Review of Administrative Decisions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Scott Andrew Doyle
Applicant
Commissioner for Fair Trading
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application for Administrative Review / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant demonstrated the requisite two years of relevant building experience for an endorsed contractor licence under the Home Building Act 1989
- 2 Whether experience gained on commercial projects counts as relevant residential building experience
- 3 Whether referee statements and letters constitute sufficient evidence of wide-ranging general building work experience
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the applicant had demonstrated at least two years' relevant building experience across referenced residential and commercial projects, as evidenced by referee statements and letters, and that the Tribunal could deal with the application under s55(6) of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 to protect the applicant's interests. The applicant satisfied the requirements under the Home Building Act 1989 for an individual endorsed contractor licence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment