Cooper v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2017] NSWCATAD 242

Cooper v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2017] NSWCATAD 242

The respondent erred by treating the Instrument as inflexible and determinative. On the evidence of the applicant's prior licences, qualifications, references, integrity and extensive construction supervision experience, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant met the statutory requirements of fitness and propriety, qualifications, experience and capability under the Home Building Act 1989. The correct and preferable decision was therefore to issue the Qualified Supervisor Certificate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Administrative Review of Refusal of Application for a Qualified Supervisor Certificate Under the Home Building Act 1989 / Tribunal Review After Refusal and Internal Review Affirmation
Outcome
Respondent's decision set aside; substituted decision that the respondent issue the applicant with a Qualified Supervisor Certificate within 28 days.
Legal Topics
['qualified Supervisor Certificate' 'general Building Work' 'qualifications and Experience' 'government Policy' 'correct and Preferable Decision']
['administrative Law' 'home Building Regulation'] ['qualified Supervisor Certificate' 'general Building Work' 'qualifications and Experience' 'government Policy' 'correct and Preferable Decision']

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

Administrative Review of Refusal of Application for a Qualified Supervisor Certificate Under the Home Building Act 1989 / Tribunal Review After Refusal and Internal Review Affirmation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant had the requisite qualifications, experience and capability for a Qualified Supervisor Certificate in general building work under the Home Building Act 1989.' "Whether the respondent's Instrument should be applied inflexibly as determinative of the qualification requirements." 'Whether the correct and preferable decision was to issue the applicant with a Qualified Supervisor Certificate.']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent erred by treating the Instrument as inflexible and determinative. On the evidence of the applicant's prior licences, qualifications, references, integrity and extensive construction supervision experience, the Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant met the statutory requirements of fitness and propriety, qualifications, experience and capability under the Home Building Act 1989. The correct and preferable decision was therefore to issue the Qualified Supervisor Certificate.

Court Disposition

Respondent's decision set aside; substituted decision that the respondent issue the applicant with a Qualified Supervisor Certificate within 28 days.

Orders

  • ["The respondent's decision to refuse the applicant's application for a Qualified Supervisor Certificate is set aside." 'In substitution for that decision, the Tribunal decides that the Respondent is to issue the applicant with a Qualified Supervisor Certificate within 28 days of the date of this decision.']