Drew v Queensland Building and Construction Commission - [2015] QCAT 11

CITATION:

Drew v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2015] QCAT 11

PARTIES:	Richard Douglas Drew (Applicant)
v
Queensland Building and Construction Commission (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

GAR358-13 / GAR359-13 / GAR364-13 / GAR372-13 / GAR373-13 / GAR378-13 / OCR241-13

MATTER TYPE:

General administrative review matters

HEARING DATE:

7, 8 and 9 October 2014

HEARD AT:

Bundaberg

DECISION OF:

Member Paratz

DELIVERED ON:

16 January 2015

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

GAR358-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 30 October 2013 is confirmed.

GAR359-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 20 September 2013 is confirmed.

GAR364-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 23 September 2013 is confirmed.

GAR372-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 23 September 2013 is confirmed.

GAR373-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 23 September 2013 is confirmed.

GAR378-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 30 October 2013 is confirmed.

OCR241-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 28 August 2013 is confirmed.

CATCHWORDS:

BUILDING CERTIFIER – UNSATISFACTORY CONDUCT –Where a building certifier was found to have engaged in unsatisfactory conduct in seven matters by the QBCC – where an ongoing conflict between the certifier and the local authority – whether the conduct of the certifier breached the Code of Conduct and legislative requirements

Building Act (Qld) 1975

Drew v Bundaberg Regional Council [2011] QCA 359
Bundaberg Regional Council v Ross & Drew [2011] QPEC 137
Chief Executive, Office of Fair Trading v Fuller [2008] QCCTPAMD041
Re Seidler [1986] 1 Qd R 486
Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 366
Oliver v Pool Safety Council [2014] QCAT

APPEARANCES:

APPLICANT:

Mr Drew in person

RESPONDENT:

Mr S.E. Seefeld of Counsel

REASONS FOR DECISION

Mr Drew is a building certifier. He is seeking review of seven separate decisions by the Queensland Building and Construction Commission (QBCC) that he had engaged in “unsatisfactory conduct” pursuant to section 204 of the Building Act 1975 (the Act).
The seven separate applications were heard together. The case numbers, the date of the QBCC decision and addresses of the relevant properties are as follows:

GAR358-13 30 October 2013 2 Jasper Court, Branyan (Jasper Court)

GAR 359-13 20 September 2013 6 Seahorse Court, Innes Park (Seahorse Court)

GAR364-13 23 September 2013 39 Palm View Drive, Moore Park Beach (Palm View Drive)

GAR372-13 23 September 2013 22 Blain Street, Bargara (Blain Street)

GAR373-13 23 September 2013 87 Commodore Drive, South Bingera (Commodore Drive)

GAR378-13 30 October 2013 54 Grahams Road, Sharon (Grahams Road)

OCR241-13 28 August 2013 17 Clipper Court, Innes Park (Clipper Court)

The matters all relate to approvals of carports or sheds by Mr Drew as a building certifier. He operated a business known as Burnett Country Certifiers.
The matter was heard over three days in Bundaberg. Oral evidence was given by Mr Drew,…

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 Drew 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: [2015] QCAT 11
Decision Date: 16 January 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Drew v Queensland Building and Construction Commission concerns a building certifier found to have engaged in unsatisfactory conduct across seven different instances by the QBCC. The certifier, represented by the appellant, sought judicial review of the QBCC's decisions to uphold the findings of unsatisfactory conduct. The Queensland Building and Construction Commission, acting through its delegate, was represented by the respondent. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the building certifier's conduct breached the Code of Conduct and relevant legislative requirements, specifically under the Building Act 1975.

The court examined the nature and extent of the unsatisfactory conduct, considering both the Code of Conduct and the statutory provisions. It assessed the evidence and findings made by the QBCC, focusing on whether these were reasonable and supported by the material before the Commission. The court determined that the QBCC had adequately considered the evidence and appropriately applied the Code of Conduct and legislative requirements. The ongoing conflict between the certifier and the local authority was noted, but the court found that this did not undermine the QBCC's decisions.

Having reviewed the decisions, the court found that the QBCC was correct in upholding the findings of unsatisfactory conduct. The court confirmed the decisions of the QBCC, affirming that the building certifier's conduct did indeed breach the Code of Conduct and legislative requirements. The appellant's application for judicial review was dismissed. The final orders of the court were to confirm the decisions made by the QBCC on various dates between August and October 2013.

Orders

Orders of the court

GAR358-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 30 October 2013 is confirmed.

GAR359-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 20 September 2013 is confirmed.

GAR364-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 23 September 2013 is confirmed.

GAR372-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 23 September 2013 is confirmed.

GAR373-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 23 September 2013 is confirmed.

GAR378-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 30 October 2013 is confirmed.

OCR241-13

1. The decision of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission made on 28 August 2013 is confirmed.

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.

GAR358-13	30 October 2013	2 Jasper Court, Branyan (Jasper Court)
GAR 359-13	20 September 2013	6 Seahorse Court, Innes Park (Seahorse Court)
GAR364-13	23 September 2013	39 Palm View Drive, Moore Park Beach (Palm View Drive)
GAR372-13	23 September 2013	22 Blain Street, Bargara (Blain Street)
GAR373-13	23 September 2013	87 Commodore Drive, South Bingera (Commodore Drive)
GAR378-13	30 October 2013	54 Grahams Road, Sharon (Grahams Road)
OCR241-13	28 August 2013	17 Clipper Court, Innes Park (Clipper Court)