Nunn v Building Services Authority

[2011] QCAT 677

CITATION: Nunn v Building Services Authority [2011] QCAT 677

PARTIES:	Graham Leslie Nunn
v
Building Services Authority

APPLICATION NUMBER:   GAR038-11

MATTER TYPE: General administrative review matters

HEARING DATE:     On the papers

HEARD AT:  Brisbane

DECISION OF: Susan Gardiner, Member

DELIVERED ON: 12 July 2011

DELIVERED AT:      Brisbane

ORDERS MADE: 1.    The application for leave to be legally represented is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

Legal Representation – application in review of decision of professional misconduct by BSA against building certifier – proceedings relating to disciplinary action – right to representation without leave

Building Act 1975, ss 204, 205, 206
Queensland Civil and Administrative Act 2009, s 43

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

The hearing was on the papers.

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. Graham Leslie Nunn has filed an application with QCAT to review a decision of the Building Services Authority under s 205 of the Building Act 1975 that Mr Nunn’s conduct as a building certifier constitutes professional misconduct under section 204 of that Act .

1. If Mr Nunn’s review is not successful, under section 204(6) of the Building Act 1975, the BSA must apply to QCAT to start a disciplinary proceeding against Mr Nunn.

1. The BSA has made an application to be legally represented in these proceedings.  Mr Nunn objects to the granting of legal representation.

1. Section 43(2)(b)(ii) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 provides that parties in proceedings in this Tribunal may be represented by someone else if the proceeding relates to taking disciplinary action. 

1. This review of the BSA’s decision against Mr Nunn clearly relates to taking disciplinary action as, if the review fails, formal disciplinary proceedings will inevitably commence against Mr Nunn.

1. Under the exception in section 43(2)(b)(ii) of the QCAT Act, neither party requires leave of the Tribunal to be represented in this review. Each party has a right to such representation. It is then a decision for each party to elect if that right is exercised.

1. As the application is unnecessary, it is dismissed.