Tabbaa v NSW Taxi Council [2020] NSWCATOD 164

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Tabbaa v NSW Taxi Council [2020] NSWCATOD 164 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 7 February 2020 Decision date: 07 February 2020 Jurisdiction: Occupational Division Before: K Ransome, Senior Member Decision: (1) The application is dismissed. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW – taxi driver – no legislative requirement that driver be authorised – respondent not an administrator - no administratively reviewable decision Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Passenger Transport Act 1990 Point to Point Transport (Taxis and Hire Vehicles) Act 2017 Cases Cited: Alameddine v Roads and Maritime Services [2018] NSWCATAD 22 Hossain v Roads and Maritime Services [2018] NSWCATOD 11 Texts Cited: None cited Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mouhammad Riad Tabbaa (Applicant) NSW Taxi Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel:

Solicitors: Piggot Stinson Lawyers (Respondent) Applicant (Self Represented) File Number(s): 2019/00247607 Publication restriction: Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION 1. On 1 August 2019, the applicant, Mouhammad Road Tabbaa, wrote to the NSW Taxi Council inquiring about his eligibility to become a taxi driver. Mr Tabbaa enclosed a copy of a criminal history check certificate which disclosed that he was due to appear in court on 13 June 2019 on a criminal charge of "Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical etc harm (personal) – T2". On 2 August 2019 the NSW Taxi Council advised Mr Tabbaa that it was unable to process his application to become an authorised taxi driver. He was advised that he may be able to re-apply if he receives a not guilty verdict in respect of the charge. 2. Mr Tabbaa applied to the Tribunal for review of the decision of 2 August 2019 that his application was unable to be processed. He states that a pending charge is not a valid reason for the NSW Taxi Council to engage in discriminatory/inequitable practices such as refusing to provide him with training and a driver identification card.