Real Estate and Business Agents Supervisory Board v Carey

[2010] WASCA 109

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Tribunals
3. › Appeal from State Administrative Tribunal
4. › Appeal on question of law only
5. › Distinction between errors of law and errors of fact
6. › Whether Tribunal's finding unreasonable in Wednesbury sense
7. › Whether finding that person was fit and proper to hold licence was so unreasonable no reasonable decision maker could have reached it
8. › State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 105(2)
1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Unreasonableness
4. › Wednesbury unreasonableness
5. › Scope and limits of review on ground of unreasonableness
6. › Whether review on ground of unreasonableness can become merits review
7. › Whether fact-finding amenable to Wednesbury review
1. Real Estate Agents
2. › Licensing
3. › Renewal of triennial certificate
4. › Fit and proper person
5. › Scope of decision maker's judgment
6. › Whether absence of final adverse findings precluded finding of unfitness
7. › Real Estate and Business Agents Act 1978 (WA), ss 27(1), 31
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Time for commencing appeal
3. › Statutory time limit
4. › Whether Christmas vacation exclusion in Rules of Supreme Court applies to statutory time limit in SAT Act
5. › Extension of time
6. › Factors relevant to grant of extension
7. › State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 105(5), (7)
8. › Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 3 r 3

Quick Take

The Christmas vacation exclusion in O 3 r 3 of the Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA) does not apply to the 28-day time limit for appeals from the State Administrative Tribunal prescribed by s 105(5) of the SAT Act. A Tribunal's finding on a 'fit and proper person' assessment will not constitute Wednesbury unreasonableness merely because the appellate court might have reached a different conclusion on the merits; the question is whether the finding was so unreasonable that no reasonable decision maker could have reached it.