Obradovic -v- Commissioner for Fair Trading, Office of Fair Trading (GD)

In Obradovic, the applicant challenged a decision of the Office of Fair Trading (OFT), which was affirmed by the Civil and Administrative Tribunal (CAT). The applicant, a taxi driver, was found to have engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct by falsely advertising that he was not a taxi driver. This was a dispute over statutory interpretation and the findings made by the tribunal in relation to the applicant’s conduct.

The applicant argued that the tribunal made findings that were not supported by the evidence. The tribunal had concluded that the applicant was misleading or deceptive in his conduct by falsely advertising that he was not a taxi driver. The applicant contended that the evidence showed that he had not made any such representation. The court was required to determine whether the tribunal’s findings were contrary to the evidence and, if so, whether this was a sufficient ground for setting aside the tribunal’s decision.

The court found that the tribunal’s findings were not contrary to the evidence. The tribunal had considered all the evidence before it and had made findings that were reasonably open on that evidence. The applicant had not established that the tribunal’s findings were in error. The court also noted that the applicant had not identified any error of law or jurisdictional error that would warrant the setting aside of the tribunal’s decision. The appeal was dismissed as it related to grounds 1-18 of the notice of appeal, but the appeal was adjourned pending the determination of the applicant’s application for leave to extend to the merits. The Registrar was directed to list the leave application for hearing.