Anderson v Queensland Building and Construction Commission - [2025] QCAT 372

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Anderson v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2025] QCAT 372

PARTIES:

ROWAN ANDERSON

(applicant)

v

QUEENSLAND BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION COMMISSION

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

GAR420-25

MATTER TYPE:

General administrative review matters

DECISION ON:

18 September 2025

REASONS ON:

30 September 2025

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Lee Benjamin

ORDERS:

1. Pursuant to s 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), the application to review a decision filed 1 July 2025 is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – where application to review Queensland Building and Construction Commission decision – whether decision is reviewable – where review jurisdiction not enlivened – whether application should be dismissed

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 18, s 24, s 47

Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld) s 86, s 86A, s 86B, s 86C, s 86E, s 87

Simons & Ors v Dowd Lawyers Pty Ltd [2020] QCAT 348

Strike Development Projects Pty Ltd v Michael Peter Fitzpatrick t/as MF Professional Painting [2022] QCAT 40

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)

Applicant:

Roman & Romans Lawyers

Respondent:

In-house

REASONS FOR DECISION

What is this decision about?

On 1 July 2025, Rowan Anderson, the applicant, filed an application in the Tribunal to review a Queensland Building and Construction Commission (QBCC) decision, refusing to accept an internal review application dated 3 June 2025. The question for me is whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear and determine the application. In my view the answer is no and the application must be dismissed.

What happened?

On 3 June 2025, the QBCC issued a decision entitled, “Applicant – Internal Review Application REF#2849248 – Out of Time Declined.” It is undisputed and incontestable that this is the decision Mr Anderson sought to review in the proceeding:
(a)this was the only decision annexed to the application to review a decision filed 1 July 2025;
(b)in the application to review a decision, Mr Anderson stated that the decision to be reviewed was made and received on 3 June 2025 – the date the aforementioned decision was issued; and
(c)when prompted as to why the decision was wrong or not properly made, Mr Anderson stated:
“The decision Maker incorrectly applied section 86B(b)(i) of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 in deciding that the Internal Review Application was made out of time.”[1]
[1]The Applicant’s application to review a decision filed on 1 July 2025, p 4.
On 1 July 2025, Mr Anderson filed his review application with the Tribunal.
On 25 July 2025, the Tribunal directed the parties to file and serve submissions on whether Mr Anderson’s application should be dismissed under s 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act). The Tribunal adopted this course because the QBCC’s decision did not appear to…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Anderson v Queensland Building and Construction Commission and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] QCAT 372
Decision Date: 18 September 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter before the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) involved Anderson, who sought to review a decision made by the Queensland Building and Construction Commission (QBCC). Anderson was aggrieved by the Commission's decision which had implications for his professional standing and operations in the building and construction industry. The dispute centred on whether QCAT had the jurisdiction to review the QBCC's decision and whether the application should proceed.

The primary legal issue was whether QCAT's review jurisdiction was engaged in this instance. Anderson argued that the QBCC's decision was flawed and that QCAT should intervene. The QBCC, on the other hand, contended that QCAT did not have the jurisdiction to review its decision. The court had to determine if there were any grounds under the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) that would allow QCAT to review the QBCC's decision.

In delivering its judgment, the Tribunal examined the statutory provisions governing the review of decisions made by the QBCC. It found that the particular circumstances of this case did not meet the criteria for triggering QCAT's review jurisdiction. The Tribunal concluded that the QBCC's decision was not subject to review by QCAT. Consequently, the application was dismissed as QCAT did not have the authority to review the QBCC's decision. The Tribunal's reasoning was grounded in the statutory framework and the specific facts of the case, leading to the dismissal of Anderson's application.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Pursuant to s 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), the application to review a decision filed 1 July 2025 is dismissed.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.