Young v Roads and Maritime Services [2014] NSWCATAP 7

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Young v Roads and Maritime Services [2014] NSWCATAP 7 Hearing dates: 27 February 2014 Decision date: 20 March 2014 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel - Internal Before: Wright J, President S Montgomery, Senior Member P Goudie, General Member Decision: 1. Leave to extend the appeal to the merits of the decision under appeal is refused. 2. The appeal is dismissed. Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Passenger Transport Act 1990 (NSW) Passenger Transport Regulation 2007 (NSW) Cases Cited: Lloyd v Veterinary Surgeons Investing Committee [2005] NSWCA 456; 65 NSWLR 245 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Christopher Young (Appellant) Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent) Representation: Appearances: C Young, In-person (Appellant) A Wozniak, Solicitor (Respondent) Solicitors: Smythe Wozniak Legal (Respondent) File Number(s): 139045 Decision under appeal Citation: [2013] NSWADT 216 Date of Decision: 2013-10-04 00:00:00 Before: P Molony, Judicial Member File Number(s): 133004

reasons for decision 1Wright J, President, S Montgomery, Senior Member, P Goudie, General Member: The appellant, Mr Young, appealed against a decision of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal (ADT) affirming the respondent's decision to refuse accreditation for Mr Young to operate a public passenger service - Young v Roads and Maritime Services [2013] NSWADT 216. On the appeal Mr Young represented himself and Mr Wozniak, solicitor, appeared for the respondent. Both parties provided written submissions on the appeal and took the opportunity to make full oral submissions at the hearing on 27 February 2014. 2Mr Young appealed as of right on 4 questions of law and also sought leave to have the appeal extended to the merits of the ADT's decision. The Appeal Panel has decided that the appeal on the questions of law should be dismissed and leave to extend the appeal to the merits should be refused. Our reasons for reaching these conclusions are set out below.