G&N Building Contractors Pty Ltd v Queensland Building Services Authority
[2013] QCAT 125
| CITATION: | G&N Building Contractors Pty Ltd v Queensland Building Services Authority [2013] QCAT 125 |
| PARTIES: | G&N Building Contractors Pty Ltd (Applicant) |
| V | |
| Queensland Building Services Authority (Respondent) |
| APPLICATION NUMBER: | GAR254-12 |
| MATTER TYPE: | General administrative review matters |
| HEARING DATE: | On the papers |
| HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
| DECISION OF: | Mr Richard Oliver, Senior Member |
| DELIVERED ON: | 5 April 2013 |
| DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
| ORDERS MADE: | 1. The application for review filed 29 June 2012 is struck out. |
| CATCHWORDS: | Summary Disposal – where the decision under review is not a reviewable decision – where Tribunal has no power to extend time Queensland Building Services Authority Act1991 s 86 Smith v Queensland Building Services Authority [2010] QCAT 448; Customizer Kitchens Qld v Queensland Building Services Authority [2011] QCAT 13; Cornpig Pty Ltd v Queensland Building Services Authority [2011] QCAT 255 |
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act).
REASONS FOR DECISION
On 29 June 2012 G&N Building Contractors applied to review a decision of the Queensland Building Services Authority made on 7 June 2012. On the face of the application the decision sought to be reviewed is the decision by the Authority to issue a “Notice of Debt” to G&N Building Contractors in respect of building work it carried out at 7 Currimundi Road, Currimundi. The precursor to the issuing of the notice of debt was the decision to direct rectification of the building work on 6 February 2012[1] with a subsequent decision that is, Notice of Potential Debt which issued on 28 May 2012.
[1] Direction to rectify 3272.
The decision sought to be reviewed, that is the Notice of Debt is not a reviewable decision under section 86 of the Queensland Building Services Authority Act. The grounds of review in the application set out reasons why G & N should not have to pay the amount claimed in the Notice of Debt. Rather than setting out a basis to review the decision, what G&N Building Contractors is really asserting, is a defence to the Notice of Debt, if proceedings are brought against it for recovery.
In response to the application, the Authority has filed an application to strike out the applicants application for review on a number of grounds but principally because such an application is prohibited by section 86(2) of the Queensland Building Services Authority Act 1991. If the applicant is confused and is really seeking to review the decision to issue the direction to rectify or alternatively, the notice of potential debt and scope of work, this is now also prohibited. Subsection 2 of section 86 states that the Tribunal must not review a decision to direct rectification if 28 days has elapsed from the date of the direction and the Authority has issued an infringement notice. An infringement notice was issued to the applicant on 29 May 2012, prior to the filing of the application for review. Further, a review application cannot be brought if 28 days have elapsed since the decision was made about the scope of works. These matters cannot be cured with an application to extend time under section 61 of the QCAT Act.
As the exercise of powers under the QCAT Act is limited by the enabling Act, here the Queensland Building Services Authority Act, the Tribunal cannot extend time and lacks jurisdiction to review the Authority’s decision the subject of the application and further, on the face of the application it is not a reviewable decision.[2]
[2] Smith v Queensland Building Services Authority [2010] QCAT 448; Customizer Kitchens Qld v Queensland Building Services Authority [2011] QCAT 13; Cornpig Pty Ltd v Queensland Building Services Authority [2011] QCAT 255.
The application for review is struck out.
0
3
0