Ross v Building Practitioners Board

The respondents, the Building Practitioners Board, issued notices of inquiry to the appellant, a registered building practitioner, in relation to certain allegations. Despite the issuance of these notices, the hearings had not yet commenced when the Building Practitioners Board was abolished by legislative amendment. The appellant sought to have the notices of inquiry quashed on the grounds that the Board lacked the requisite legal authority to act following the legislative changes. The court was tasked with interpreting the transitional provisions of the new legislation to determine whether the Board had the authority to complete the inquiries that were initiated prior to a specified date.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the inquiry process had officially commenced prior to the effective date of the legislative changes, thereby granting the Board the authority to complete the inquiries under the transitional provisions. The court examined the nature of the inquiry process, considering whether it constituted a single event or an ongoing process, and determined that the inquiry process involved multiple steps beyond the mere issuance of the notice. The court concluded that since the inquiry process had not fully commenced before the legislative changes, the Board lacked the authority to proceed with the inquiries.

In dismissing the appeal, the court held that the transitional provisions did not empower the Board to complete inquiries that had not begun prior to the specified date. The court emphasised that the inquiry process was ongoing and multifaceted, and as such, it had not fully commenced prior to the legislative amendment. The transitional provisions only applied to inquiries that had been initiated in their entirety before the specified date. Consequently, the Board's attempts to continue the inquiries post-amendment were invalid. The court's interpretation of the transitional provisions upheld the legislative intent to ensure that the Board's actions aligned with the new statutory framework.

The court did not make any orders, as the appeal was dismissed on the basis of the statutory interpretation and the lack of authority under the transitional provisions. The Building Practitioners Board's notices of inquiry were consequently deemed invalid, and the appellant's application to quash the notices was successful.