Qiu v Building Professionals Board [2013] NSWADT 289

Qiu v Building Professionals Board [2013] NSWADT 289

Mr Qiu's repeated misclassification of substantial residential developments as eligible for complying development certificates, together with other proven failures to apply Codes SEPP standards, showed insufficient competence and diligence in exercising accredited certifier functions. Although one contested swimming pool setback allegation was not proven and some issues involved unclear or difficult provisions, seven allegations were proven and collectively warranted a global finding of unsatisfactory professional conduct. The correct and preferable disciplinary response was a reprimand, a reduced fine of $7000, and a reporting condition to an accredited certifier approved by the Board...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of a Disciplinary Determination of the Building Professionals Board Concerning an Accredited Certifier / Review of Disciplinary Finding and Action Taken by the Board Under Section 31(4)
Outcome
Respondent's decision varied.
Legal Topics
['accredited Certifier Discipline' 'unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'complying Development Certificates' 'codes SEPP Compliance' 'review of Disciplinary Orders']
['administrative Law' 'professional Discipline' 'planning and Development' 'building Certification'] ['accredited Certifier Discipline' 'unsatisfactory Professional Conduct' 'complying Development Certificates' 'codes SEPP Compliance' 'review of Disciplinary Orders']

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 a Disciplinary Determination of the Building Professionals Board Concerning an Accredited Certifier / Review of Disciplinary Finding and Action Taken by the Board Under Section 31(4)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Qiu issued complying development certificates in circumstances where the proposed dwellings exceeded the two storey limit under the Codes SEPP.' 'Whether the 57 Wellbank Street development failed to comply with public reserve setback, privacy screen and excavation requirements under the Codes SEPP.' 'Whether the 7 Seabrook Avenue swimming pool setback failed to comply with the Codes SEPP.' 'Whether the 7 Seabrook Avenue principal private open space complied with the Codes SEPP.' 'Whether the proven conduct amounted to unsatisfactory professional conduct under s 19 of the Building Professionals Act 2005.' 'What disciplinary orders were the correct and preferable decision.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Qiu's repeated misclassification of substantial residential developments as eligible for complying development certificates, together with other proven failures to apply Codes SEPP standards, showed insufficient competence and diligence in exercising accredited certifier functions. Although one contested swimming pool setback allegation was not proven and some issues involved unclear or difficult provisions, seven allegations were proven and collectively warranted a global finding of unsatisfactory professional conduct. The correct and preferable disciplinary response was a reprimand, a reduced fine of $7000, and a reporting condition to an accredited certifier approved by the Board...

Court Disposition

Respondent's decision varied.

Orders

  • ['Mr Qiu is reprimanded.' 'Mr Qiu is fined the sum of $7000, payable within 28 days of receipt of notice of this decision.' 'A condition is imposed on his accreditation requiring him to provide a copy of any complying development certificate he issues within two days of its issuance to an accredited certifier...