Spence v Queensland Building and Construction Commission

The applicant, Mr. Spence, sought a review of a decision by the Queensland Building and Construction Commission, which declined to provide a direction to rectify building work. The dispute involved the alleged defectiveness of building work, specifically whether it was in accordance with approved plans, and the Commission's discretion to issue such a direction. The case was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). The primary legal issues centered on whether the building work was defective, if the Commission's discretion to order rectification should be exercised, and if such an order could be made despite the applicant's dissatisfaction with a previous direction. Additionally, the court examined whether it was fair to order rectification considering the passage of time, deterioration, and the proximity to the ocean.

The QCAT determined that the building work was indeed defective as it was not in accordance with the approved plans. The court found that the Commission had the discretion to order rectification and that such an order could be made despite the applicant's dissatisfaction with a previous direction. The court also considered the factors of deterioration over time and proximity to the ocean but concluded that these did not preclude the issuance of a rectification direction. The Commission's decision to not order rectification for certain items was found to be unreasonable, and the court substituted its decision with specific orders for rectification in respect of several complaint items.

The final orders included confirmation of the Commission's decision on certain complaint items, setting aside and substituting the decision on other items, and outlining the terms of the new rectification directions. The court also provided a process for any party to apply for costs, specifying deadlines for submissions and evidence, and indicating that costs would be determined on paper unless otherwise requested.