Ernst v Building Services Authority

In the appeal of Ernst v Building Services Authority, the parties involved were Ernst, the appellant, and the Building Services Authority, the respondent. The dispute centred around the respondent’s decision to refuse Ernst's application to become a "permitted individual" under the Queensland Building Services Authority Act 1991. Ernst challenged the decision in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which was ultimately set aside and replaced with a similar decision upon rehearing. Ernst sought further review, but his application was dismissed.

The court was tasked with determining whether the Tribunal had the authority to review the respondent’s decision on mixed questions of law and fact, and if Ernst had been denied natural justice by the respondent attributing admissions to him that he did not make. Furthermore, the court had to decide whether Ernst, as the controlling individual of a group of companies, had taken all reasonable steps to avoid the circumstances that led to the refusal of his application.

The court found that the Tribunal did have the jurisdiction to review the mixed questions of law and fact inherent in the respondent's decision. It also concluded that Ernst had not been denied natural justice, as the attributed admissions were not pivotal to the decision. The court further determined that Ernst had not taken all reasonable steps to avoid the circumstances that resulted in the refusal of his application. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the Tribunal's decision was set aside, and the respondent's decision was confirmed on rehearing, refusing Ernst's application to become a "permitted individual".