NSW Caselaw
Administrative Decisions Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Kocoski v Department of Services, Technology and Administration [2011] NSWADT 135 Hearing dates: 6 May 2011 Decision date: 08 June 2011 Before: Judicial Member Huntsman Decision: The decision is affirmed Catchwords: Contractor licence as builder; whether Applicant possesses experience of a kind and for such a period, as would enable the Applicant to do, or supervise, the work for which the certificate is required; relevant industry experience in a wide range of building construction work. Legislation Cited: Home Building Act 1989 Home Building Regulation 2004 Cases Cited: Thukral v Commissioner of Fair Trading [2006] NSWADT 356 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Applicant - Nicholas Kocoski Respondent - Department of Services, Technology and Administration Representation: Applicant - in person Respondent - Legal Services, New South Wales Department of Fair Trading File Number(s): 113043
REASONS
Background 1This is an application for review of a decision by the Director General, Department of Services, Technology and Administration, New South Wales Fair Trading (the Respondent) to refuse the application by Mr Nicholas Kocoski (the Applicant) for a contractor licence, category of building. The Applicant applied for the contractor licence on 3 September 2010 and on 3 December 2010 the Respondent refused the application. On 18 January 2011 the Applicant requested review of this decision and an internal review decision, affirming the original decision, was made by the Respondent on 25 January 2011. The Applicant now requests review of the decision by the Tribunal. The statement of reasons issued by the Respondent indicates that the primary reason that the Applicant's application for a contractor licence was refused was that the Respondent found that the Applicant did not possess the necessary industry experience required under relevant provisions of the Home Building Act 1989 (the Act) and the Home Building Regulation 2004 (the Regulation). 2Relevant background includes that the Applicant had previously applied for a contractor licence which had been refused by the Respondent. This prior application was made on 9 December 2008 and was refused by the Respondent on 6 February 2009. This prior application was subject to internal review, and to an application by the Applicant to the Tribunal for review. On 13 October 2009 the Applicant withdrew his appeal from the Tribunal in order to address the issue of his educational qualifications. A fresh application, which is the subject of the current review proceedings, was subsequently lodged with the Respondent, by the Applicant, on 3 September 2010. As discussed further below, in his application the Applicant maintains that the Respondent previously accepted his referees as to his relevant industry experience, in relation to an application for his contractor licence.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate