D & V Hambling Pty Ltd as Trustee for D & V Hambling Custodian Deed v Commissioner of State Revenue [2017] QCAT 415
CITATION: D & V Hambling Pty Ltd as Trustee for D & V
Hambling Custodian Deed v Commissioner of
State Revenue [2017] QCAT 415
PARTIES: D & V Hambling Pty Ltd as trustee for D & V
Hambling Custodian Deed
(Applicant)
v
Commissioner of State Revenue
(Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER: GAR064-16
MATTER TYPE: General administrative review matters
HEARING DATE: On the papers
HEARD AT: Brisbane
DECISION OF: Member Allen
DELIVERED ON: 24 November 2017
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
ORDERS MADE: 1. The decision of the Commissioner of
State Revenue is confirmed.
CATCHWORDS: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE
TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – review of
decision by the Commissioner of State
Revenue under the Building Boost Grant Act
2011 (Qld) – whether building work under the
contract started before 1 May 2013 – where
contract subject to deed of variation – where
building work performed prior to deed of
variation – where building work performed
prior to building approval
Building Boost Grant Act 2011 (Qld), s 12,
s 13, s 14, s 96 , s 97
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Act 2009 (Qld) s 17, s 18, s 19, s 20, s 21,
s 22, s 23, s 24
Sustainable Development Act 2009 (Qld), s 7,
s 340
O’Neill v Commissioner of State Revenue
-- 1 of 9 --
2
[2015] QCATA 108
APPEARANCES:
This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act).
REASONS FOR DECISION
[1] D & V Hambling Pty Ltd made an application dated 26 August 2012 for
the Building Boost Grant in respect of a house to be built off the plan in
Chinchilla.1 The application was refused by the Commissioner of State
Revenue on the basis that the contract did not comply with the
requirements of the Building Boost Grant Act 2011 (Qld) (BBG Act) in
regard to the date that the building work must commence under the
contract. D & V Hambling has now applied to the Tribunal for a review of
that decision.
[2] The Tribunal when acting in its review jurisdiction stands in the shoes of
the original decision maker to hear and decide a review in accordance
with the QCAT Act and the enabling Act, the BBG Act.2 The Tribunal is
required to hear and decide the review by way of a reconsideration of the
evidence before the Commissioner, when the decision was made, unless
the Tribunal considers it necessary in the interests of justice to allow new
evidence and under the same law that applied to the making of the
original decision.3 I note in this case that the Tribunal has made extensive
directions for the filing of further material which will be considered in the
making of the decision.
[3] The purpose of the review is to make the correct and preferable decision.4
The Tribunal may confirm or amend the decision; set aside the decision
and substitute its own decision or set aside the decision and return it to
the decision-maker for reconsideration.5
[4] The Commissioner’s role is to assist the Tribunal to make the decision.6
This includes by the provision of a statement of reasons for the decision
and a copy of any document or thing that may be relevant to the
Tribunal’s review of the decision.
[5] An applicant for a building boost grant is entitled to be paid the grant if the
transaction for which the grant is sought is an eligible transaction and has
been completed.7 The BBG Act defines various types of eligible
1 S21 Documents, p 72 to 86.
2 QCAT Act, s 19.
3 BBG Act, s 97(2).
4 Ibid, s 20.
5 Ibid, s 24.
6 QCAT Act, s 21.
7 BBG Act, s 12.
-- 2 of 9 --
3
transactions, one of which is an eligible home purchase contract.8 A home
purchase contract is defined in the Dictionary to the BBG Act as:
…a contract entered into by a person to purchase a home and a relevant
interest in the land on which the house is built, or is expected to be built, on
or before the completion of the contract.
[6] An eligible home purchase contract is defined as follows in s 14 of the
BBG Act:
a) it is for the purchase of a new home that is, or is to be, built on land
in the State; and
b) the transaction commencement day is on or after 1 August 2011 and
before 1 May 2012; and
c) either-
i) it is for the acquisition of a relevant interest in the land on which
the home has been built; or
ii) it is for the acquisition of a relevant interest in the land on which
the home is to be built, before completion of the contract, by or
for the seller of the home and at the expense of the seller;
d) it has been entered into by each person who on completion of the
contract will have a relevant interest in the land; and
e) the total of the following is less than $600000-
i) The unencumbered value of the home;
ii) The unencumbered value of the relevant interest in the
residential land at the transaction commencement day for the
contract; and
f) For a contract to purchase a new home on a proposed lot on an
unregistered plan of subdivision of land-
i) The contract provides that the building work must start before 1
May 2013 and be completed before 1 May 2015; or
ii) If subparagraph (i) does not apply, the building work under the
contract is-
A) Started before 1 May 2013; and
B) Completed before 1 May 2015, or within a longer period
allowed by the Commissioner.
8 BBG Act.
-- 3 of 9 --
4
[7] The transaction commencement day for a home purchase contract is the
date the contract is made.9
[8] D & V Hambling filed a copy of the contract for sale10 with the application
for the grant. The contract is dated 30 April 2012 with a purchase price of
$524,768.00. There are no dates set out in the contract in regard to when
building work must start or be completed. The contract is subject to the
seller obtaining all necessary approvals for the construction of the
dwelling before the approval date in accordance with clause 20.1. The
approval date in the contract means three months after the later of notice
of plan registration or the contract becoming unconditional. The settlement
date is stated in clause 2.1(a) of the contract to be the later of one month
after the substantial completion date (eight months after the plan creating
a separate instrument of title has registered) relating to the dwelling or the
date which is 9 calendar months after the date of notice from the seller to
the buyer that the plan creating a separate instrument of title has
registered with the department. Dwelling is defined in the contract as the
residential house to be built on the land. The seller must by the substantial
completion date substantially complete construction of the dwelling in
accordance with
clause 20.4 of the contract. The seller will cause the Dwelling to be built
substantially in accordance with the building specifications (attached to
the contract as Annexure A), in a good and workmanlike manner and in
accordance with all applicable laws, regulations and standards,11 in
accordance with clause 20.5 of the Contract. The building specifications
comprise a schedule of inclusions and standard specifications a floor plan
and site plan.
[9] It is clear from the contract that certain of the requirements of s 14 of the
BBG Act have been met. The contract is for the purchase of a new home
to be built on land in the State, so s 14(a) is satisfied. The transaction
commencement day is 30 April 2012, so s 14(b) is satisfied. The contract
is for a relevant interest in land on which a house is to be built, so s
14(c)(ii) is satisfied. The contract purchase price is $524,768.00, so s
14(e) is satisfied.
[10] The application required that certain supporting documentation be
provided apart from the contract, that is a copy of the registration
confirmation statement or current title search and a copy of the final
inspection certificate. These were not provided and a request was made
by the Commissioner for them to be provided.12
9 BBG Act, s 13.
10 S21 Documents, p 87 to 119.
11 S21 Documents, p 100.
12 S21 Documents, p 71.
-- 4 of 9 --
5
[11] The current title search and final inspection certificate were provided by
letter of 3 April 2015.13 The current title search14 shows D & Hambling Pty
Ltd was registered as owner on 26 June 2014, so s 14(d) is satisfied.
[12] As the contract does not specify when the building work must start and be
completed then s 14(f)(ii) applies and the transaction will be an eligible
transaction if the building work under the contract is started before
1 May 2013 and completed before 1 May 2015. As mentioned the title
search shows that the land was registered in D & V Hambling’s name on
26 June 2014 and the final inspection certificate15 is dated 27 May 2014
these confirm that the building work was completed before 1 May 2015.
[13] The final inspection certificate discloses the following information about
the inspections of the various building stages:
a) Foundation and Excavation stage 4 December 2013;
b) Slab stage 9 December 2013;
c) Frame Stage 28 January 2014; and
d) Final stage 8 May 2014.
[14] The Commissioner noting that the first inspection occurred on 4
December 2013 made a decision to refuse the application on 22 April
2015, on the basis that s 14(f)(ii)(A) of the BBG Act was not satisfied as
the building work had not commenced before 1 May 2013.
[15] D & V Hambling objected to the decision by letter and attachments dated
18 September 2015.16 The grounds of the objection included that:
a) The start date for building works was 24 January 2013 when
earthworks (excavation and filing) operations started on the lot.
Which was said to be evidenced by documentation attached to an
email dated 11 October 2013. That is the Stage 4 Construction
program which shows that the earthworks (called ‘site cut’) for lot 37
was completed on 24 January 2013.
b) It is noted that there is no definition of building work in the BBG Act
and it is sought to rely on definitions of ‘Building Work’ in the Building
Act 1975 (Qld), which include excavation and filling as building
work.17 ‘Building Work’ is also said to be defined in the Queensland
Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld) (QBCC Act).
In particular, work consisting of Earthmoving and excavating is
13 Ibid, p 59.
14 Ibid, p 60.
15 Ibid, p 61.
16 Ibid, p 35.
17 Building Act 1975 (Qld), s 5.
-- 5 of 9 --
6
building work – with reference to s10 and 12 and part 2 interpretation
and s32 of Schedule 1AA.
c) Following the completion of the earthworks (site cut) on lot 37,
subsequent building work was delayed pending the resolution of a
revised house design and Council approval for same. Council had
introduced a Temporary Local Planning Instrument (TLPI), related to
homes exceeding three bedrooms and three bathrooms which came
into force just before the building application was filed. Council
advised that the building application for the original house design of
4 bedrooms and 4 bathrooms did not comply with the TLPI.
d) A revised design to comply with the TLPI was prepared and
submitted to Council by the Builder and building permit was issued
on
8 November 2013.
e) The building work then resumed with the final stage inspection on
27 May 2014.
[16] All of the requirements of s 14 have been met apart from the requirement
that the building work under the contract started before 1 May 2013. The
issues which the Tribunal must determine are what is meant by the
phrase “building work under the contract” in s 14(f)(ii) and when did the
building work under this contract start.
[17] D & V Hambling have relied on various statutory definitions of building
work and the Commissioner, while initially using an amalgam of a
dictionary definition, later submitted that the definition of building work
should be that under the contract. The Commissioner makes the point that
it is the building work under the contract which is important and not
building work generally. While the definitions of building work provided by
D & V Hambling are by their nature general.
[18] I agree that it is the building work under the contract which it is important
to consider and so regard must be had to the contract itself. The definition
of building work used in the contract is any works carried out on the Land
in the nature of the construction, alteration, renovation or repair of a
dwelling or other building; fence’ retaining wall; driveway. External sign or
hoarding; external flood lights; or external fittings. Clause 9.1 of the
contract requires the buyer to obtain the seller’s approval before
commencing any building works.
[19] The contract requires the seller to construct a dwelling on the land in
accordance with the building specifications which form Annexure A to the
contract, in accordance with clause 20 of the Contract. The building
specifications in the heading preliminaries and site works include the
-- 6 of 9 --
7
preparation of the site including retaining walls (if required) and footings
and slab constructed to engineers standards.18
[20] Further evidence in regard to the building work under the contract is
contained in the development permit for building works on lot 37 which
was issued on 8 November 2012.19 Item 9 of the Development permit
deals with inspections and requires that:
The builder for the building work must is given to Council before all
or any of the stages of construction is complete. Building work is not
to proceed beyond any stage until the building certifier has issued a
Form 16- Inspection certificate”.20 The Development permit states
that a notice of inspection must be given at each of the following
stages of the building work. The first stage was the
Foundation/excavation stage and the first inspection was required for
the set out of the building work and site earthworks as an aspect of
that stage.21
[21] The Commissioner sought to rely on the decision in O’Neill v
Commissioner of State Revenue22 in regard to what would constitute the
laying of foundations and that general clearing of the land would not form
part of that work. D & V Hambling has rightly responded that the decision
in that case was in regard to an owner-builder application and the
legislative requirements are different. For an owner-builder arrangement
the transaction commencement day is the date the laying of the
foundations starts.23 Whereas here the important date is the date the
building work under the contract commenced.
[22] While the contract was signed on 30 April 2012 the building of the house
was significantly delayed. This was because the original plan included a
house with four bedrooms and four bathrooms and as mentioned above
this design did not comply with the Council’s requirements and had to be
revised.
[23] D & V Hambling filed a deed of variation in respect of the contract with an
effective date of 1 April 2013. The deed altered the contract price, made
the contract conditional upon the obtaining of finance and deleted the
building specifications annexed to the contract and inserted the building
specifications contained in the schedule to the deed in lieu thereof.
[24] The Commissioner submits that the variations relate directly to the
building work.
18 S21 Documents, p 116.
19 Ibid, p 21.
20 Ibid, p 23.
21 Ibid, p 24.
22 [2015] QCATA 108 [17]; [19].
23 BBG Act, s 13 and s 17(b).
-- 7 of 9 --
8
[25] I am satisfied The “building work under the contract” for the purposes of s
14(f) was then from the date of the deed of variation the building work set
out in the specifications attached to the deed of variation. A development
permit was obtained in respect of the building work specified in the deed
of variation on 8 November 2013.
[26] The next question is when did that building work start?
[27] D & V Hambling had submitted that the building work under the contract
commenced on 24 January 2013 when the site cut for the house took
place. The evidence for this is a spreadsheet, which shows completed
building work for various lots in the estate with one entry relating to lot 37
being a site cut on 24 January 2013. Mr Goodwin, the building manager
for the estate, in an email dated 27 June 2016 in regard to the building
work stated that:
…when the land was received from the developer to build all lots needed to
be individually surveyed to plot the property boundaries and set for the
building footprint. Lot 37 as per all other sites required site cutting to suit
the design of the dwelling which was achieved as the first stage of the
building process after the land was released from the developer.
[28] In a further email dated 7 August 2016 he stated that the attached
program does represent a true schedule of the site cut date as being
completed on that date.
[29] D & V Hambling set out in their submissions that the work performed on
24 January 2013 would have included the labour of the surveyor setting
out the building’s position and levels on the site and the labour exerted by
the operator of the earthmoving drott, excavator or truck contribute to the
construction of the building. I note that the source of this information is not
stated and there is no suggestion that a representative of D & V Hambling
was on site at the time the work was said to have been done.
[30] D & V Hambling state that the Commissioner has previously accepted that
the site cut work was done on the site on 24 January 2013, while the
Commissioner did not consider that this was building work. The Tribunal
though is reconsidering the evidence including the new evidence provided
and is not bound by any previous finding of the Commissioner.
[31] There are emails between D & V Hambling and the Seller form December
2012 with one on 24 January 2013 which show that the site plan which
was ultimately used in the specifications to the deed of variation had been
agreed by 24 January 2013. That site plan was not part of the building
work under the contract as at 24 January 2013 in the deed pof variation
was which show thatThe Commissioner has submitted that the Seller was
required to obtain all necessary approvals for the construction of the
dwelling in accordance with clause 20.1 of the Contract and if the
approvals were not obtained by the approval date the contract could be
terminated in accordance with clause 20.3 of the Contract. Further that,
-- 8 of 9 --
9
“Development”, defined as carrying out building work,24 may commence
when a development permit for the development takes place.25
[32] I note that the site plan for the dwelling to be constructed in accordance
with the deed of variation is the same as the site plan which is set out in
the emails between D & V Hambling and the Seller on 24 January 2013.
Therefore, it is possible that a site cut could have been performed on lot
37 in respect of the house that was ultimately built on the land.
[33] The only evidence provided by D & V Hambling that any building work
was undertaken prior to 1 May 2013 relates to the work that was said to
have taken place on 24 January 2013. It is not enough that building work
may have been performed on the lot; it must be building work under the
contract to satisfy s 14(f)(ii)(A). No building work under the contract could
have been performed prior to 1 April 2013 when the deed of variation took
effect.
[34] The building work under the contract must then be building work which
was performed after 1 April 2013 as that is the date that the building work
under the contract was specified and moreover after 8 November 2013
when the development approval was granted in accordance with the
Sustainable Planning Act 2009.
[35] The transaction entered by D & V Hambling is not an eligible transaction
because the building work under the contract did not start before
1 May 2013. The decision of the Commissioner is confirmed.
24 Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (Qld), s 7.
25 Ibid, s 340.
-- 9 of 9 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QCAT/2017/415