Three-time convict to get hearing into rejected real estate licence
THE REAL Estate Board has been ordered by the Court of Appeal to conduct a hearing for a real estate salesman whose application was rejected in December 2020 because he has three previous convictions.
Michael Reid, the applicant, had pursued a real estate salesman course at the Real Estate Training Institute in January 2020. He was offered a position as a sales associate by a real estate agency pending the issuance of a salesman’s licence.
He applied to t he board on November 12, 2020 for a salesman’s licence. He submitted the requisite documents, one of which was a police certificate. The certificate disclosed that Reid has three previous convictions. He was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment for rape, admonished and discharged for assault occasioning actual bodily harm and malicious destruction of property for which he was fined $50,000 or three months’ imprisonment. He obtained the first conviction for rape when he was 40 years old and the others when he was 48 years old.
The application was submitted 10 years after his conviction for rape and three years after the other offences. The court, in its written reasons, pointed out that even though Reid could have been considered a rehabilitated person in relation to two of the convictions, “he could not have been considered a rehabilitated person in relation to the offence of rape, as the sentence of four years for the rape was incapable of being “spent”.
Following a pre-registration inspection, it was confirmed that Reid had met the academic qualifications to be registered as a salesman. However, the issue of his previous convictions was left for the consideration of the board which refused to grant the licence because of the convictions.
Reid was informed in December 2020 that the board had indicated that, due to his previous convictions, he did not satisfy the board as required by section 14 (1) (b) of the Real Estate (Dealers and Developers) Act that he was a fit and proper person to hold such a licence.
BREACHED OWN PROCEDURES
He appealed on the grounds that the board erred in finding that he was not a fit and proper person solely on the basis of prior convictions. One of the grounds of appeal was that he was not afforded a hearing before the board made its decision.
President of the Court of Appeal Justice Patrick Brooks, Justice Jennifer Straw and Justice Carol Edwards ruled on April 8 that the board was in breach of its own procedures when it made its decision before giving Reid a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
The court set aside the board’s decision and remitted the case to the board for an oral hearing to be held “so that the appellant is afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard in support of his application, as per the requirements of section 41 of the Act”. It was the court’s finding that the board did not follow the mandate of that section of the Act. The section has a requirement for an applicant to be informed that the board has a concern with regard to a particular issue and give the applicant a reasonable opportunity to make his case before the board in respect of that issue.
Attorneys-at-law Isat Buchanan and Iqbal Cheverria, instructed by Isat Buchanan, represented Reid. Further written submissions for the appellant were filed by attorney-at-law John Clarke.
The board was represented by attorney-at-law Gillian Burgess.