Platinum Plumbing & Drainage v Redland City Council

[2011] QCAT 88

CITATION: Platinum Plumbing & Drainage v Redland City Council [2011] QCAT 88

PARTIES:	Mr William Cramer trading as Platinum Plumbing & Drainage
v
Redland City Council

APPLICATION NUMBER:   GAR337-10

MATTER TYPE: General administrative review matters

HEARING DATE:      On the papers

HEARD AT:    Brisbane

DECISION OF: Ms Peta Stilgoe, Member

DELIVERED ON: 21 March 2011

DELIVERED AT:       Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.    The tribunal has no jurisdiction.

2.    The application is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS : 

JURISDICTION – PLUMBERS AND DRAINAGE – where information notice issued – where application to tribunal – where application filed in excess of 12 months after notice issued – whether tribunal had jurisdiction to review decision – whether application filed out of time

Plumbing and Drainage Act 2002, s 86(12)
Integrated Planning Act 1997, s 4.2.12A (repealed)

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

This matter was heard on the papers in accordance with section 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. The Council issued an information notice to Mr Cramer on 6 July 2009.  It detailed the matters that required attention before the Council would issue a compliance certificate.  In October 2010, Mr Cramer applied to the Tribunal for a review of the information notice.  The Council says that QCAT does not have jurisdiction.

2. Unfortunately, the dispute between Mr Cramer and the Council has been escalated by some misapprehensions. Previous correspondence between the parties has progressed on the basis that the Council had issued an enforcement notice and Mr Cramer’s submissions to QCAT have been based on this assumption. However, it is clear to me that the information notice issued as a result of a request for a compliance assessment. The Council’s power to issue an information notice is provided in section 86(12) of the Plumbing and Drainage Act 2002. Section 86(12) falls within part 4 of the Act.

3. Whether or not QCAT has jurisdiction is determined by the provisions of the enabling Act, in this case, the Plumbing and Drainage Act 2002. That Act does confer jurisdiction on QCAT to review a number of decisions that can be made pursuant to the Act but the ability to review an information notice given under section 86(12) is not one of those decisions.

4. Because the information notice was made in July 2009, the process for review was governed by the now repealed Integrated Planning Act 1997. Section 4.2.12A(1)(a)(ii) provided that if a person has been given an information notice under Part 4 of the Plumbing and Drainage Act 2002 the person may appeal that decision to a tribunal. “Tribunal” in the Integrated Planning Act 1997 meant a building and development tribunal, not QCAT[1]. Section 4.2.12A(2) provides that any appeal must be brought within 20 business days after the day the notice of the decision is given to the person. On any view, Mr Cramer’s application for review is to the wrong tribunal and well out of time. QCAT has no jurisdiction and Mr Cramer’s application should be dismissed.

   [1] Chapter 2, Part 4 of the Integrated Planning Act 1997.