Yousefi and Victorian Building Authority

This matter concerned an application by Mr Yousefi to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a review of a decision by the Victorian Building Authority. The Authority had refused Mr Yousefi's application for registration as a building surveyor in Victoria, on the grounds that his existing registrations as a building surveyor in Western Australia were not substantially equivalent to the Victorian registration, and that equivalence could not be achieved by imposing conditions.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Yousefi's Western Australian registrations were collectively equivalent to the Victorian registration sought, pursuant to section 23(1)(c) of the Mutual Recognition Act 1992 (Cth). If not, the Tribunal also had to consider whether equivalence could be achieved through the imposition of conditions, in accordance with section 29 of the Act. The assessment of equivalence under the Mutual Recognition Act was to be a technical exercise focused on the activities authorised by each registration, rather than Mr Yousefi's personal work history, experience, competencies, or skills.

The Tribunal noted that section 29 of the Mutual Recognition Act outlines a five-step process for determining occupational equivalence. This involves identifying the occupation and authorised activities in the first state, then identifying an equivalent occupation and its authorised activities in the second state, and finally comparing these activities to determine if they are substantially the same, considering whether conditions could achieve equivalence. The Tribunal also noted that Ministerial declarations under section 32 of the Act could establish equivalence, but no such declaration had been made concerning quantity surveyors. Despite the Tribunal suggesting an adjournment to allow Mr Yousefi to pursue a merit-based application based on his experience, he elected to proceed with the review under the Mutual Recognition Act.