//
[2012] WASAT 41
General information, not legal advice.
State Administrative Tribunal (WA)
2012-03-01
Mr P
Original judgment source is linked above.
does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear the application in circumstances where the respondents submit that:
Tribunal answer: yes.
1.1 they are not the correct respondents because the building licence was issued by the City of Perth in the name of Nuform Constructions Pty Ltd, not the respondents.
Tribunal answer: Mr Brian Inglis Smith is the correct respondent. Mr Franjo Turibaka is discharged from the proceedings.
1.2 the application is out of time, because it was lodged with the Building Commission on 29 November 2011 which is more than six years after the completion of the regulated building service to which the complaint relates, namely the supervising architect stated in a letter to Nuform Constructions Pty Ltd that practical completion had occurred on 16 November 2005.
Tribunal answer: the building service complaint was not made more than six years after the completion of the regulated building service and it is therefore within time.
1.3 the preliminary notice provided to the respondents is not signed or dated therefore it is not valid.
1.4 the annexure to the complaint form is not signed or dated and therefore it is invalid.
Tribunal answer: the annexure to the complaint form is valid.
I certify that this and the preceding [82] paragraphs comprise the reasons for decision of the State Administrative Tribunal.
___________________________________