sec.67AMNotice that not a fit and proper person to director, secretary, influential person or nominee who is not a licensee

### sec.67AM Notice that not a fit and proper person to director, secretary, influential person or nominee who is not a licensee For a director, secretary, influential person or nominee who is not a licensee, subsection (3) applies if, after considering the submissions made by the director, secretary, influential person or nominee for the notice under section 67AJ (2) , the commission— still considers— that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and is not satisfied— that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective. A nominee who is included in this provision as a person who was a licensed nominee when the company carried out the defective work may not be licensed when the notice is given. Subsection (3) also applies if there are no submissions for the notice under section 67AJ (2) . The commission must, by written notice given to the director, secretary, influential person or nominee inform the director, secretary, influential person or nominee— that the commission— still considers— that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and is not satisfied— that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective; and that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee is taken not to be a fit and proper person for part 3 , division 2 , for the term calculated under section 67AO and stated in the notice; and of the director’s, secretary’s, influential person’s or nominee’s right to apply to the tribunal for a review of the commission’s decision; and how, and the period within which, the director, secretary, influential person or nominee may apply to the tribunal for the review; and any right the director, secretary, influential person or nominee has to have the operation of the commission’s decision stayed by the tribunal. A director, secretary, influential person or nominee who is given notice that they are taken not to be a fit and proper person (a banned individual ) for a stated term may have the commission’s decision reviewed under section 86 (1) (n) . A director, secretary, influential person or nominee given notice under subsection (3) is taken not to be a fit and proper person for part 3 , division 2 as stated in the notice. s 67AM ins 2003 No. 1 s 33 amd 2009 No. 24 s 1677 ; 2013 No. 38 s 14 sch 1 (sec.67AM-ssec.1) For a director, secretary, influential person or nominee who is not a licensee, subsection (3) applies if, after considering the submissions made by the director, secretary, influential person or nominee for the notice under section 67AJ (2) , the commission— still considers— that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and is not satisfied— that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective. A nominee who is included in this provision as a person who was a licensed nominee when the company carried out the defective work may not be licensed when the notice is given. (sec.67AM-ssec.2) Subsection (3) also applies if there are no submissions for the notice under section 67AJ (2) . (sec.67AM-ssec.3) The commission must, by written notice given to the director, secretary, influential person or nominee inform the director, secretary, influential person or nominee— that the commission— still considers— that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and is not satisfied— that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective; and that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee is taken not to be a fit and proper person for part 3 , division 2 , for the term calculated under section 67AO and stated in the notice; and of the director’s, secretary’s, influential person’s or nominee’s right to apply to the tribunal for a review of the commission’s decision; and how, and the period within which, the director, secretary, influential person or nominee may apply to the tribunal for the review; and any right the director, secretary, influential person or nominee has to have the operation of the commission’s decision stayed by the tribunal. A director, secretary, influential person or nominee who is given notice that they are taken not to be a fit and proper person (a banned individual ) for a stated term may have the commission’s decision reviewed under section 86 (1) (n) . (sec.67AM-ssec.4) A director, secretary, influential person or nominee given notice under subsection (3) is taken not to be a fit and proper person for part 3 , division 2 as stated in the notice. - (a) still considers— (i) that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and (ii) that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and - (i) that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and - (ii) that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and - (b) is not satisfied— (i) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or (ii) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective. - (i) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or - (ii) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective. - (i) that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and - (ii) that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and - (i) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or - (ii) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective. - (a) that the commission— (i) still considers— (A) that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and (B) that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and (ii) is not satisfied— (A) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or (B) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective; and - (i) still considers— (A) that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and (B) that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and - (A) that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and - (B) that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and - (ii) is not satisfied— (A) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or (B) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective; and - (A) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or - (B) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective; and - (b) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee is taken not to be a fit and proper person for part 3 , division 2 , for the term calculated under section 67AO and stated in the notice; and - (c) of the director’s, secretary’s, influential person’s or nominee’s right to apply to the tribunal for a review of the commission’s decision; and - (d) how, and the period within which, the director, secretary, influential person or nominee may apply to the tribunal for the review; and - (e) any right the director, secretary, influential person or nominee has to have the operation of the commission’s decision stayed by the tribunal. Note— A director, secretary, influential person or nominee who is given notice that they are taken not to be a fit and proper person (a banned individual ) for a stated term may have the commission’s decision reviewed under section 86 (1) (n) . - (i) still considers— (A) that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and (B) that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and - (A) that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and - (B) that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and - (ii) is not satisfied— (A) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or (B) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective; and - (A) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or - (B) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective; and - (A) that the company carried out the work stated in the notice; and - (B) that the work carried out was tier 1 defective work; and - (A) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee was not in a position to influence the conduct of the company’s affairs in relation to the defective work; or - (B) that the director, secretary, influential person or nominee exercised reasonable diligence to ensure that the work carried out was not defective; and