Shi and Commissioner for Fair Trading (NSW)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Shi for registration as a professional mechanical engineer in New South Wales under the *Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020* (NSW), pursuant to the *Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition (New South Wales) Act 1996* (TTMR-NSW Act). Mr Shi sought to rely on his existing registrations in New Zealand as an Independent Qualified Person (IQP) and a Producer Statement Author, arguing these were substantially equivalent to the New South Wales registration sought. The Commissioner for Fair Trading (NSW) had refused the application. The decision reviewed was made by Emeritus Professor P A Fairall, Senior Member.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Shi's New Zealand registrations as an IQP and a Producer Statement Author constituted "equivalent occupations" for the purposes of the TTMR-NSW Act, specifically whether they were substantially the same as being a professional mechanical engineer under the *Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020* (NSW). This involved an assessment of the scope, responsibilities, and regulatory framework of each role.

The Tribunal reasoned that the role of a Producer Statement Author, as defined by Auckland Council policy, was not legislatively based and lacked the penalty provisions and mandatory declaration requirements found in the NSW *Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020*. Furthermore, the scheme involved a discretionary acceptance of producer statements and did not impose the same level of accountability or risk as the NSW legislation, particularly concerning design compliance declarations. The Tribunal concluded that the New Zealand registrations were not substantially equivalent to the registration sought in New South Wales.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the delegate's decision and substituted it with a decision that Mr Shi was not entitled to registration as a mechanical engineer in New South Wales under the TTMR-NSW Act.