Riddell v Queensland Building Services Authority - [2012] QCAT 226

CITATION:

Riddell v Queensland Building Services Authority [2012] QCAT 226

PARTIES:

Peter James Riddell
(Applicant/Appellant)

Queensland Building Services Authority

(Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

OCR101-11

MATTER TYPE:

General administrative review matters

HEARING DATE:

10 April 2012

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Michelle Howard, Member

DELIVERED ON:

29 May 2012

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1. The decision of the Queensland Building Services Authority dated 21 April 2011 to refuse to categorise Peter Riddell as a permitted individual is confirmed.

CATCHWORDS:

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW – PERMITTED INDIVIDUAL – whether individual took all steps to avoid the coming in to existence of the circumstances that resulted in the liquidation of the company – where significant conflict between directors and lack of cooperation by other director

Queensland Building Services Authority Act 1991
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Act 2009
Building and Construction Industry Payments
Act 2004

Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336
Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Pochi (1980) 4 ALD 139
Re Kirby and Collector of Customs (1989) 20 ALD 369
Younan v Queensland Building Services Authority [2010] QDC 158
Hyde v QBSA [2003] QBT 072-02 [52-53]
CCYPCG v Lister [2011] QCATA 87
Queensland Racing Limited v McMahon [2010] QCATA 73
Laidlaw v QBSA [2010] QCAT 70

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

APPLICANT:	Mr Riddell represented himself
RESPONDENT:	Ms Jodie Stroud, in-house legal officer, represented the Queensland Building Services Authority

REASONS FOR DECISION

On 21 April 2011, the Queensland Building Services Authority (QBSA) made a decision to refuse an application from Mr Riddell seeking that he be categorised as a permitted individual for a relevant event under the Queensland Building Services Authority Act 1991 (the QBSA Act). Mr Riddell applied to the tribunal for a review of the decision made by QBSA.

It is uncontentious that Mr Riddell had been advised by QBSA that it considered him an excluded individual[1] under the QBSA Act following the appointment of liquidator for Titan Steelfixing Pty Ltd (Titan) for the benefit of a creditor. Mr Riddell was a director and secretary for Titan at the time of the appointment of the liquidator.
[1]QBSA Act, s 56AC provides for the circumstances in which a person becomes an excluded individual.

The applicable law

The purpose of a review conducted by the tribunal in its review jurisdiction is to produce the correct and preferable decision[2] following a fresh hearing on the merits.[3] The Tribunal must make its decision according to the applicable law, and based on the evidence presented to it.[4] In effect, the tribunal stands in the shoes of the original decision-maker, in this case the QBSA, and makes the decision anew.
[2] Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, s 20(1).
[3] Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, s 20(2).
[4]CCYPCG v Lister [2011] QCATA 87; Queensland Racing Limited v McMahon [2010] QCATA 73.

The relevant facts must be established to the reasonable satisfaction of the Tribunal, that is, on the civil standard of proof. Although it is…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Riddell v Queensland Building Services Authority 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

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2012] QCAT 226
Decision Date: 29 May 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Riddell v Queensland Building Services Authority involved a dispute between Peter Riddell and the Queensland Building Services Authority (QBSA) over the refusal to categorise Riddell as a permitted individual following the liquidation of the company of which he was a director. The case was heard in the Queensland Court of Appeal.

The primary legal issue was whether Riddell had taken all steps necessary to avoid the circumstances that led to the company's liquidation. This included assessing whether Riddell could be considered a permitted individual under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002, which would exempt him from personal liability for the company's debts. The court also had to consider the impact of the conflict between the directors and the lack of cooperation by the other director on Riddell's ability to manage the company's financial affairs effectively.

The Court of Appeal held that Riddell had not taken all steps necessary to avoid the company's liquidation. The court found that there was a significant conflict between the directors and that Riddell's attempts to resolve the conflict were inadequate. The court also found that Riddell had not acted in good faith and had not taken reasonable steps to ensure the company's solvency. The court concluded that Riddell was not a permitted individual and that the QBSA's decision to refuse to categorise him as such was correct.

The court confirmed the decision of the QBSA dated 21 April 2011 to refuse to categorise Riddell as a permitted individual.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The decision of the Queensland Building Services Authority dated 21 April 2011 to refuse to categorise Peter Riddell as a permitted individual is confirmed.

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.