| CITATION: | Queensland Building Services Authority v Chandra & Anor [2013] QCATA 142 |
| PARTIES: | Queensland Building Services Authority (Applicant/appellant) |
| v | |
| Mr Suresh Chandra Building Approval & Inspection Consultants Pty Ltd (Respondents) |
| APPLICATION NUMBER: | APL025 -13 |
| MATTER TYPE: | Appeals |
| HEARING DATE: | 22 April 2013 |
| HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
| DECISION OF: | Justice Alan Wilson, President Peta Stilgoe, Senior Member |
| DELIVERED ON: | 15 May 2013 |
| DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
| ORDERS MADE: | 1. The appeal is allowed. 2. The decision of 16 November 2012 is set aside. 3. The scope of works to be performed by Mr Chandra was not limited to certification of the internal work but included an obligation to take all reasonable and necessary steps to ensure that the conversion of a Class 1a space to a Class 10a space complied with all relevant building laws, regulations and codes. |
| CATCHWORDS: | APPEAL – OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION MATTER – DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS – BUILDING PERSONNEL – where respondents engaged to perform approval and certification functions relating to works involving conversion of garage to bedrooms – where the respondents approved and certified the internal works – where there was water damage due to the failure to waterproof the walls of the building – where the Queensland Building Services Authority commenced disciplinary proceedings against the respondents for failure to ensure conversion complied with requirements of class 1a structure – where QBSA contend respondents did not take into account the change of classification from a class 10 (garage) to class 1a (habitable area) – where the Member found the respondents only owed a duty to assess the internal renovations – where the applicants seek to appeal that decision – whether the Member erred in finding the respondents certification of the works was confined to the internal works ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE – PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS AND NATURAL JUSTICE – where the Member determined the matter on a basis that neither party notified to the other or contended for – where the Member did not allow the parties a reasonable opportunity to provide submissions on the point upon which the Member based the decision – whether there was a denial of natural justice Building Act 1975 (Qld), s 32 Syntech Resources Pty Ltd v Peter Campbell Earthmoving (Aust) Pty Ltd [2011] QSC 293, applied |
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
APPLICANT: | Mr S Formby, in house Counsel for the Queensland Building Services Authority |
| RESPONDENT: | Mr J Gregg, Gregg Lawyers |
REASONS FOR DECISION
This appeal arises out of an allegation by the QBSA, in disciplinary proceedings against Mr Chandra, that he was guilty of professional misconduct in the course of his work as a building certifier under the Building Act 1975 (Qld).
The second respondent, Building Approvals and Inspection Consultants Pty Ltd, is a company which employed Mr Chandra to perform building certification work.
In July 2005, Mr Chandra was asked…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Queensland Building Services Authority v Chandra and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2013] QCATA 142
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the Member erred in finding that the respondents' certification of the works was confined to the internal works, and whether there was a denial of procedural fairness and natural justice when the Member determined the matter on a basis that neither party notified to the other or contended for, without allowing the parties a reasonable opportunity to provide submissions on the point upon which the Member based the decision. The Court found that the Member did indeed err in his interpretation of the respondents' obligations. The Court further found that the Member's determination constituted a denial of natural justice, as it did not provide the parties with an opportunity to address the critical issue that ultimately formed the basis of the decision.
In allowing the appeal, the Court set aside the Member's decision of 16 November 2012. The Court clarified that the scope of works to be performed by the respondents was not limited to certification of the internal work but included an obligation to take all reasonable and necessary steps to ensure that the conversion of a Class 1a space to a Class 10a space complied with all relevant building laws, regulations, and codes. The Court's decision underscored the importance of ensuring that disciplinary proceedings adhere to procedural fairness and natural justice, and that the obligations of building personnel are correctly interpreted and applied.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The appeal is allowed.
2. The decision of 16 November 2012 is set aside.
3. The scope of works to be performed by Mr Chandra was not limited to certification of the internal work but included an obligation to take all reasonable and necessary steps to ensure that the conversion of a Class 1a space to a Class 10a space complied with all relevant building laws, regulations and codes.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.