Meredith v Queensland Building Services Authority

[2012] QCAT 146

CITATION: Meredith v Queensland Building Services Authority [2012] QCAT 146

PARTIES:	Mr Steven Grant Meredith (Applicant)
v
Queensland Building Services Authority (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER: OCR076-11 / OCR077-11 / OCR078-11

MATTER TYPE: Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE: 4 October 2011

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Dr Bridget Cullen, Member

DELIVERED ON: 10 April 2012

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.   I set aside three decisions of the Queensland Building Services Authority, dated 10 March 2011.

2.   I substitute the decision of this Tribunal that Steven Grant Meredith be categorised as a permitted individual for all three relevant events.

CATCHWORDS:

OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION – Application to review decision by the Queensland Building Services Authority not to categorise the applicant as a permitted individual – duties of director – conduct of co-director – decisions set aside by Tribunal

Queensland Building Services Authority Act 1991, s 56AD

Adler v Australian Securities and Investments Commission; Williams v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2003] NSWCA 131

Daniels v Anderson (1995) 37 NSWLR 438
Gold Ribbon (Accountants) Pty Ltd (in liq) v Sheers & Ors [2006] QCA 335
Younan v Queensland Building Services Authority [2010] QDC 158

Delonga v QBSA [2004] QCCTB 26
Nation v BSA [2006] QCCTB 114
Darvill v QBSA [2008] QCCTB 35

Laidlaw v Queensland Building Services Authority [2010] QCAT 70

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

APPLICANT:	Mr Steven Grant Meredith
RESPONDENT:	Queensland Building Services Authority represented by Robinson Locke

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

1. The Applicant, a young builder named Steven Grant Meredith, seeks the Tribunal’s review of three decisions made by the Respondent, the Queensland Building Services Authority (“QBSA”).  The QBSA has declined to categorise Mr Meredith as a Permitted Individual in relation to three Relevant Events:

Application No.         Relevant Event

OCR076-11                Bankruptcy
OCR077-11                M&M Constructions Pty Ltd
OCR078-11                Miller Homes No. 1 Pty Ltd

1. The submissions[1] of the QBSA are quite helpful in succinctly setting out the criteria that the Tribunal is to apply. For the Applicant to succeed, in accordance with s 56AD(8) of the Queensland Building Services Authority Act 1991, he must demonstrate that he took “all reasonable steps to prevent the coming into existence of the circumstances which resulted in the happening of the relevant event.”

   [1]        Closing submissions of the QBSA, filed in QCAT on 10-10-11.

1. The “relevant events” are not in contention.  Therefore, in order to decide whether Mr Meredith took all reasonable steps to avoid the relevant events (as he now asserts is the case), the Tribunal must:

§      Identify the circumstances that resulted in the happening of the relevant event;

§      Consider whether Mr Meredith took all reasonable steps to prevent those circumstances coming into existence; and

§      Consider the exercise of discretion.

Agreed Facts

1. Prior to my hearing this matter, the parties worked together in order to produce an Agreed Statement of Facts.[2]  Helpfully, this narrows the issues still in dispute significantly, thus leaving the only issue in contention before the Tribunal:

“whether it was reasonable for Mr Meredith to not be…