Ericson v Queensland Building and Construction Commission

CITATION:

Ericson v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2017] QCAT 35

PARTIES:

Ian James Ericson
(Applicant)

v

Queensland Building and Construction Commission

(Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

GAR378-10

MATTER TYPE:

General administrative review matters

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Kenneth Barlow QC, Member

DELIVERED ON:

23 January 2017

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.    The applicant file and serve on the respondent written submissions in support of his application by 24 February 2017.

2.    The respondent file and serve on the applicant its written submissions in opposition to the application by 24 March 2017.

3.    Unless the parties agree that the matter should be determined on the papers, the application be listed for hearing on a date no earlier than 10 April 2017, to be determined by the Tribunal in consultation with the parties.

CATCHWORDS:

Evidence – whether tender of additional evidence ought be permitted – whether evidence relevant

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

The application was determined on the papers under s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld).

REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction

1. Until 11 October 2010 the Applicant, Mr Ericson, held a contractor’s licence to carry out building work, particularly concreting.  The licence was issued to him by the respondent (QBCC), pursuant to what was then the Queensland Building Services Authority Act 1991 (now the Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991) (QBCC Act).

2. On 25 June 2009, the QBCC suspended Mr Ericson’s licence. The ground of suspension was his alleged failure to satisfy the financial requirements under the QBCC’s policy known as “Financial Requirements for Licensing” (FRL).

3. On 11 October 2010, the QBCC cancelled Mr Ericson’s licence.

4. In this proceeding, Mr Ericson seeks a review of the decision to cancel his licence. The application is made pursuant to s86(1)(c) and s87 of the QBCC Act, which give this Tribunal the jurisdiction to review a decision to suspend or cancel a licence. Under ss19 and 20 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, the purpose of the review is to produce the correct and preferable decision and the Tribunal must hear and decide the review by way of a fresh hearing on the merits.

5. I first decided the proceeding in 2012[1], but my decision was overturned on appeal.  Thereafter a number of successive applications and appeals to the Appeal Tribunal and the Court of Appeal took place.[2]  The matter was then remitted to me for a fresh decision. 

   [1]Ericson v Queensland Building Services Authority [2012] QCAT 206.

   [2]QBCC v Ericson [2013] QCATA 180; Ericson v QBSA [2013] QCA 391; Ericson v QBCC [2014] QCATA 66; Ericson v QBCC [2014] QCA 297; QBCC v Ericson [2015] QCATA 111, Ericson v QBCC [2016] QCA 140.

6. Preparatory to making that decision, the QBCC has sought to introduce additional evidence over that which was before me in 2012. Mr Ericson objects to the additional evidence being admitted, so I made…