Barnes and Victorian Building Authority

Case

[2019] AATA 4796

31 October 2019


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Barnes and Victorian Building Authority [2019] AATA 4796 [2019] AATA 4796 31 October 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application by Mr. Barnes, a registered building surveyor in Tasmania, for registration as a building surveyor in Victoria under the *Mutual Recognition Act 1992* (Cth). The Victorian Building Authority refused his application, leading to the dispute heard by Mr. A. Maryniak QC, Member. The core of the dispute revolved around whether Mr. Barnes's activities as a building surveyor in Tasmania were substantially the same as those required for registration in Victoria.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the activities undertaken by a registered building surveyor in Tasmania, particularly concerning the approval of building work, were substantially the same as those undertaken by a building surveyor in Victoria for the purposes of the *Mutual Recognition Act 1992*. This required an examination of the regulatory frameworks governing building approvals in both states, specifically the distinction between "High Risk/Permit Work" and "Medium Risk/Notifiable Work" in Tasmania, and the absence of such risk categorisation in Victoria.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the *Mutual Recognition Act 1992* aims to remove artificial barriers to interstate trade, the activities in question were not substantially the same. In Tasmania, building surveyors can approve "Medium Risk/Notifiable Work," which excludes a substantial range of new buildings. "High Risk/Permit Work" in Tasmania requires a building permit issued by a Permit Authority, a role that involves more than administrative functions and is distinct from the activities of a building surveyor. In contrast, Victorian building surveyors can assess and approve all building work, as no risk categories exist, and all work is subject to a building permit unless exempted. The Tribunal concluded that these differences were substantive and significant, meaning the activities were not substantially the same.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Victorian Building Authority to refuse Mr. Barnes's registration.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Administrative Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Statutory Construction

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Standing

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

3

Statutory Material Cited

0