
Administrative judgments from Australian courts and tribunals, with a plain-English summary, the legal holding and frequently asked questions.
The NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal dismissed an appeal, confirming that a handyman's work was defective and ordering him to pay damages. The Tribunal relied on expert evidence to determine the cost of fixing the work and found that the handyman was not properly licensed or qualified to perform the work.
In this case, the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal imposed conditions on a professional's registration due to unsatisfactory conduct. The conditions included restrictions on working as a pharmacist and handling certain pharmaceutical products, but the Tribunal did not find the conduct to be unethical or unprofessional.
In this case, the Federal Court dismissed the claimant's application seeking recusal of the judge and variation of an order requiring provision of a person. The court also ordered that if the claimant fails to provide the required security by a specified date, her substantive proceeding will be dismissed.
The NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal decided to revoke a security licence after the licensee was convicted of assault. The decision was based on new regulations that applied retroactively.
The Federal Court of Australia quashed a conviction due to reasonable doubt about the complainant's evidence, despite acquittal on other charges. The decision highlights the importance of ensuring that convictions are based on reliable evidence without reasonable doubt.
In this case, the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal ordered the appellant to pay the respondent's legal costs after an unsuccessful appeal. The Tribunal determined that special circumstances existed, including the complexity of the legal dispute and the unsuccessful nature of the appeal.
The NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal reviewed an application for a First Home Owner Grant and found that the home in question was not eligible because it had been previously sold as a place of residence. This decision was based on the definition of a 'new home' in the First Home Owner Grant (New Homes) Act 2000.
A a person government body brought a judicial review case challenging the process for considering an amalgamation of council areas. The Land and the address dismissed the case, ruling that the claimant’s alternative proposal did not need to be formally considered in the current process.
In this case, the plaintiff made an offer of compromise to settle the proceedings. However, the Court determined that the offer did not represent a true element of compromise and therefore did not grant a special costs order. The ruling was based on the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).
In this case, the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal reviewed a decision by an agency to withhold certain documents. After considering the public interest in favour of disclosure versus confidentiality concerns, the Tribunal ordered the release of the documents, highlighting the importance of government transparency.