Ozcelik v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2014] NSWCATOD 100

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Ozcelik v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2014] NSWCATOD 100 Hearing dates: 7 August 2014 Decision date: 07 August 2014 Jurisdiction: Occupational Division Before: Dr J Lucy, Senior Member Decision: The respondent's decision to refuse the applicant's application for a contractor licence is affirmed. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Home Building Act 1989 - Contractor licences - Experience in a wide range of building work Legislation Cited: Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) Home Building Regulation 2004 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW) Cases Cited: Locking v Department of Finance and Services [2013] NSWADT 239 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Cem Ozcelik (Applicant) Commissioner for Fair Trading (Respondent) Representation: C Ozcelik (Applicant in person) Office of Finance and Services, NSW Fair Trading (Respondent) File Number(s): 1420177

reasons for decision 1Mr Ozcelik applied for a review of the NSW Commissioner of Fair Trading's decision to refuse his application for a contractor licence in the category of "general building work." The Commissioner refused that application on 29 October 2013 on the basis that Mr Ozcelik did not have at least two years' relevant industry experience in a wide range of building work. 2Mr Ozcelik applied for internal review of the Commissioner's decision on 20 November 2013 and the decision was affirmed by the internal reviewer on 13 March 2014. 3Mr Ozcelik then applied to this Tribunal for review of the Commissioner's decision on 24 April 2014. He explained that his application was filed outside the 28 day period specified by r 24(3) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW) because he waited for a referee to return from overseas so he could seek the referee's advice about applying to the Tribunal. The respondent did not object to the Tribunal granting leave to hear the application out of time. 4I dispensed with the requirement that an application for an extension of time be made in writing, pursuant to rule 8 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014. 5I extended time for lodging the application under s 41 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), having considered that the application was approximately two weeks late, there was no prejudice to the respondent in allowing the application to proceed and the applicant had provided an explanation for the delay. 6On the day of the hearing, the Tribunal gave an oral decision, affirming the decision of the Commissioner. One of the parties requested written reasons for the decision pursuant to s 62 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013. These are those written reasons.