Administrative Law Analysis: Review and Revocation of a Commonwealth Broker Licence Assignment

Assignment 

Scenario

Josephine Realtor was granted authorisation as a Commonwealth broker and issued a licence under the CLAPT Act in 2020 for a term of two years. Her licence was duly renewed in 2022 and 2024. Josephine has just learned from a source at the CLAPT Authority that the Chief Executive of the CLAPT Authority is planning to revoke her licence for what he considers to be a breach by Josephine of this new rule. She suspects that the Chief Executive has been told by the Minister to cancel her licence because she knows that when she privately sold some non-Cth land adjacent to a site entered on the Commonwealth Heritage List, the Minister was angry because he wanted a friend of his to acquire and develop that site. Josephine is concerned about the prospect of her licence being revoked or cancelled and comes to you for legal advice.

In your initial conference with Josephine, she tells you that she had received emails in the first half of this year from a friend, Nikau, inquiring about purchasing and developing land adjacent to the proposed Nancy-Bird Walton Airport, a federal airport at Badgery’s Creek being developed and 5 proposed to be operated by a government-owned company, Western Sydney Airport Co Ltd (WSA). Josephine says that she and Nikau are members of the Australia New Zealand Leadership Forum, which is a private sector-led forum in which Australian and New Zealand business and government leaders meet from time to time to discuss ways of developing the trans-Tasman economy. However, Josephine tells you that it was not clear to her that the area in which Nikau expressed interest was within the airport precinct and owned by the Australian Government as Cth land or was an area outside the precinct and owned by the NSW government.

She recalls referring Nikau to WSA and having some discussions with the Finance Director of WSA about the matter but has not had any further discussion with Nikau about his interest in acquiring land at Badgery’s Creek. She says she has never inquired about Nikau’s resident status and in fact thought that he resided in the Cook Islands and only recently learnt that Cook Islanders hold New Zealand citizenship. Josephine also informs you that she has only recently discovered that when she applied to become a Commonwealth broker in 2020, she only provided a letter to the CLAPT Authority, not the prescribed form under the CLAPT Regulations 2020, undertaking, if appointed as a Commonwealth broker, to comply with all rules, standards and directions relating to the performance of any duty or task as a Commonwealth broker.

Part A

Questions

1. What steps (if any) would you advise Josephine to take to prevent the CLAPT Authority from proceeding with any plan to revoke her licence? 
2. What procedures must the CLAPT Authority follow in order to revoke Josephine’s licence? Can the CLAPT Authority take into account in coming to a decision about Josephine’s licence her failure to submit a prescribed form of undertaking at the time she first applied to be authorised Commonwealth broker? 
3. Is Josephine able to obtain copies of documents held by the CLAPT Authority concerning information that the CLAPT Authority may be able to rely on in making any decision to suspend or revoke her broker’s licence or vary the conditions of her licence? 4.
4. If the CLAPT Authority decides to revoke Joesphine’s broker licence, what advice would you give her about avenues of redress? 
5. If the new rules invoked by the CLAPT Authority had not been registered as a legislative instrument at the time the revocation decision was made, would that have any relevance or implication for the effectiveness of the decision and how would that affect the advice that you would give to Josephine? 

Part B

Questions

Assuming that the CLAPT Authority proceeds with, and notifies Josephine of, its decision to revoke her licence:

1. Is it open to Josephine to seek review of that decision in the Administrative Review Tribunal?
2. What steps would you advise Josephine to take to make an application to the Tribunal? 
3. Is there a basis on which Josephine can seek to have her licence temporarily reinstated by the Tribunal pending the hearing of her review application? 
4. What evidentiary material would you seek to obtain and place before the Tribunal and what submissions would you make to the Tribunal in support of the review application? 
5. What decisions are open to the Tribunal to make upon the substantive review of the decision of the CLAPT Authority? 
6. If the Tribunal affirms the decision of the CLAPT Authority what avenues of further review or appeal would be open to Josephine to take, and upon what basis may such action be taken, in seeking to overturn the Tribunal’s adverse decision?

Brief Summary of Assessment Requirements

This assessment required students to provide comprehensive legal advice in response to a complex administrative law scenario involving the potential revocation of a Commonwealth broker’s licence under the CLAPT Act. The task was divided into two parts, each focusing on different stages of administrative decision-making and review.

Key pointers to be covered in the assessment included:

• Identification of procedural and substantive legal issues arising from the proposed licence revocation
• Application of administrative law principles, including procedural fairness, bias, improper purpose, and relevant/irrelevant considerations
• Analysis of the statutory powers and procedures of the CLAPT Authority
• Consideration of access to information and disclosure obligations
• Advice on avenues of redress, including merits review and judicial review
• Tribunal processes, evidentiary requirements, and possible outcomes
• Impact of unregistered legislative instruments on the validity of administrative decisions

Students were required to answer a series of problem-style questions in Part A (pre-decision stage) and Part B (post-decision and review stage), demonstrating both doctrinal knowledge and practical legal reasoning.

Academic Mentor’s Step-by-Step Approach

The academic mentor guided the student through a structured and methodical process, ensuring clarity, legal accuracy, and alignment with learning outcomes.

Step 1: Issue Identification and Scenario Breakdown

The mentor first assisted the student in breaking down the factual scenario to identify:

• The decision-maker (CLAPT Authority)
• The nature of the decision (revocation of licence)
• Potential improper influence by the Minister
• Relevant conduct alleged to breach new rules

This step ensured the student clearly understood the legal context and stakes before addressing the questions.

Step 2: Addressing Part A Pre-Decision Legal Advice

The mentor guided the student to approach Part A chronologically:

• Advising Josephine on preventive steps, such as making submissions, asserting procedural fairness, and challenging bias
• Explaining the mandatory statutory procedures the Authority must follow before revocation
• Assessing whether past non-compliance (failure to submit the prescribed form) could be considered, with reference to retrospectivity and relevance
• Advising on access to documents, including freedom of information and disclosure obligations
• Outlining avenues of redress, including judicial review
• Analysing the consequences of relying on unregistered legislative instruments

Each response was framed using legal authority, statutory interpretation, and administrative law principles.

Step 3: Addressing Part B Post-Decision and Tribunal Review

For Part B, the mentor helped the student shift focus to merits review:

• Confirming Josephine’s right to seek review in the Administrative Review Tribunal
• Explaining the procedural steps to lodge a valid application
• Assessing the availability of interim relief, including temporary reinstatement of the licence
• Identifying relevant evidentiary material, such as internal documents, correspondence, and evidence of improper purpose
• Structuring persuasive submissions for the Tribunal
• Outlining the range of decisions open to the Tribunal
• Advising on appeal and further review options if the Tribunal affirms the Authority’s decision

The mentor emphasized clear linkage between facts, law, and remedies.

Outcome Achieved

Through this guided approach, the student successfully produced a:

• Well-structured, legally sound response addressing all questions
• Clear application of administrative law doctrines to a realistic scenario
• Balanced advice covering both procedural safeguards and review mechanisms

Learning Objectives Covered

This assessment enabled the student to demonstrate achievement of key learning objectives, including:

• Application of administrative law principles to complex factual scenarios
• Critical evaluation of government decision-making powers
• Understanding of procedural fairness, bias, and improper purpose
• Knowledge of merits review and judicial review mechanisms
• Development of practical legal advisory skills
• Effective legal writing, structured reasoning, and issue-based analysis

Need Assignment Help? Learn Smartly or Get a Solution You Can Submit with Confidence

Our sample assignment solution is available to help you understand the structure, legal reasoning, and academic approach required for this assessment. It’s a valuable learning resource designed to guide your own work and clarify expectations.

Important: This sample is provided for reference purposes only. Submitting it as your own work may result in plagiarism and serious academic penalties. Always use sample solutions responsibly as a study aid, not as a final submission.

If you’re short on time or want a solution tailored exactly to your unit requirements, you can order a fresh, 100% plagiarism-free assignment written from scratch by our professional academic writers.

Why order a fresh custom solution?

• Original content written specifically for your topic and assessment brief
• Zero plagiarism with proper academic referencing
• Clear, well-structured answers aligned with marking criteria
• Written by subject-matter experts with university standards in mind
• Delivered on time and ready for confident submission

Download Sample Solution               Order Fresh Assignment