Jabbour and Director-General, Department of Finance, Services, and Innovation (NSW Fair Trading)

Case

[2016] AATA 987

5 December 2016


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Jabbour and Director-General, Department of Finance, Services, and Innovation (NSW Fair Trading) [2016] AATA 987 [2016] AATA 987 5 December 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application by Mr Jabbour for a contractor licence in New South Wales, which was refused by the Director-General, Department of Finance, Services, and Innovation (NSW Fair Trading). Mr Jabbour had sought registration under the mutual recognition principle, holding a contractor licence in the Australian Capital Territory. The refusal was based on findings that Mr Jabbour had failed to disclose pertinent information regarding the external administration of a company of which he was a director, that this non-disclosure was deliberate, that there was insufficient evidence he took reasonable steps to avoid the administration, and that he was not a fit and proper person to hold a licence. The proceedings were before a Senior Member of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Jabbour was entitled to registration as a builder in New South Wales under the Mutual Recognition Act, and whether any exceptions to the mutual recognition principle applied. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider whether provisions of the *Home Building Act 1989* (NSW), relating to the applicant being a fit and proper person, having taken reasonable steps to avoid external administration, and posing no risk to the public, necessitated the refusal of the application. The Tribunal also considered whether the application should be granted with conditions and the matter of costs.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the exceptions to the mutual recognition principle, particularly those allowing a local registration authority to refuse an application. It noted that the mutual recognition principle is subject to laws regulating the manner of carrying on an occupation, provided those laws apply equally and are not based solely on qualifications. The Tribunal found that Mr Jabbour's failure to disclose material information about the administration of Buildform Constructions Pty Ltd, and the finding that this non-disclosure was deliberate, were grounds for refusal under section 23(1)(a) of the Mutual Recognition Act. Furthermore, the Tribunal considered the requirements of the *Home Building Act 1989* (NSW), which mandates refusal if the applicant is not a fit and proper person, or if the Secretary is not satisfied as to certain matters including good repute, character, honesty, and integrity. The Tribunal concluded that Mr Jabbour was not a fit and proper person, that he had not demonstrated he took reasonable steps to avoid the administration of Buildform, and that there was a risk to the public.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Director-General to refuse the application for a contractor licence. The application was therefore dismissed.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Administrative Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Judicial Review

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Standing

  • Statutory Construction

  • Appeal

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

1

Statutory Material Cited

0

Craig v South Australia [1995] HCA 58
Craig v South Australia [1995] HCA 58