Centex Australasia Pty Ltd v Commissioner for Consumer Protection

[2017] WASCA 79

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Appeal
2. › Appeal from State Administrative Tribunal
3. › Appeal on questions of fact
4. › Principles governing appellate review of findings of fact
5. › Credibility-based findings
6. › Whether findings flawed by reference to incontrovertible facts or uncontested testimony
7. › Whether glaringly improbable or contrary to compelling inferences
8. › State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 105(2), s 105(13)
1. Appeal
2. › Appeal from State Administrative Tribunal
3. › Adequacy of reasons
4. › Obligation to provide findings on material questions of fact referring to evidence
5. › Whether reasons disclosed intellectual process leading to findings
6. › Whether failure to address significant evidence and submissions
7. › State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 77(2)
1. Administrative Law
2. › Procedural fairness
3. › Tribunal decision-making
4. › Whether tribunal decided case on basis not put to parties
5. › Whether tribunal upheld case expressly abandoned by applicant
6. › Denial of opportunity to address case actually decided
1. Professions and Trades
2. › Real estate agents
3. › Disciplinary proceedings
4. › Duty to act fairly and honestly
5. › Whether sending amended management authority constituted unfair or dishonest conduct
6. › Whether conduct capable of constituting misrepresentation where both parties knew terms not agreed
7. › Real Estate and Business Agents Act 1978 (WA), s 103(2)(iii)
8. › Code of Conduct For Agents and Sales Representatives 2011, s 7(1)

Quick Take

Where a tribunal accepts one witness's evidence over another on a significant contested issue, the tribunal must set out its findings as to how one has been accepted over the other, and must address undisputed facts and uncontested evidence that bear upon the credibility assessment — a bare statement of preference is insufficient. A tribunal denies procedural fairness if it decides a case on a basis expressly abandoned by the applicant. Where an appellate court finds that on the evidence only one conclusion was reasonably open, it may determine the matter itself rather than remit, particularly where the conclusion is inevitable on agreed facts and uncontested evidence.