Jesiolowski v Department of Customer Service: Building Commission NSW [2024] NSWCATOD 72

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Jesiolowski v Department of Customer Service: Building Commission NSW [2024] NSWCATOD 72 Hearing dates: 22 April 2024 Date of orders: 07 June 2024 Decision date: 07 June 2024 Jurisdiction: Occupational Division Before: J D Little, Senior Member Decision: (1) The Decision under review is set aside. (2) A Qualified Supervisor Certificate in the specialist category of disconnection and reconnection of fixed electrical equipment (appliances and motors) is to be issued to the Applicant under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW). Catchwords: PROFESSIONS AND TRADES – Refusal of qualified supervisor certificate – disconnection and reconnection of fixed electrical equipment – administrative review of decision – scope of work. Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) Home Building Regulation 2014 (NSW) Cases Cited: Barber v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2024] NSWCATOD 42 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Antoni John Jesiolowski (Applicant) Commissioner for Fair Trading (Respondent) Representation: Applicant (Self-represented) S Pintamalli (Department of Customer Service) (Respondent) File Number(s): 2024/00053780 Publication restriction: None

REASONS FOR DECISION 1. This case concerns review of a decision by the Respondent to refuse the application of the Applicant for a qualified supervisor certificate in the category of disconnection and reconnection of fixed electrical equipment (appliances and motors) under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) (HBA). 2. On 13 July 2023, the Applicant made application for a qualified supervisor certificate in the category of disconnection and reconnection of fixed electrical equipment (appliances and motors) under the HBA (the Licence). 3. On 7 December 2023, the Respondent refused the application, citing sections 33C(1)(b)(i) and 33D(1)(a) of the HBA. The reasons provided for the refusal included that the Respondent had not satisfied the legislative requirements and the trade qualifications were not related to the work being undertaken. 4. On 1 January 2024, the Applicant requested an internal review of the decision to refuse the licence pursuant to section 53 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) (ADR Act). 5. On 17 January 2024, the Respondent affirmed the original decision (the Decision). 6. On 9 February 2024, the Applicant filed his application with this Tribunal for administrative review of the Decision. The Applicant's position is that the correct and preferable decision for this Tribunal is to set aside the Decision and replace it with a decision granting him a licence. 7. The Respondent's position is that that the correct and preferable decision for this Tribunal is to affirm the Decision to refuse the licence. 8. For the reasons that follow, and having considered all the circumstances, I find that the Decision to refuse the Applicant the Licence should be set aside, and that the Licence licence should be granted to the Applicant.