Allan v Commissioner of Police

Case [2008] NSWADT 230



CITATION: Allan v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police [2008] NSWADT 230
DIVISION: General Division
PARTIES:

APPLICANT
Alexander Robert Allan

RESPONDENT
Commissioner of Police, NSW Police
FILE NUMBER: 083034
HEARING DATES: 24 April 2008
SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 30 June 2008
 
DATE OF DECISION: 

20 August 2008
BEFORE: Montgomery S - Judicial Member
MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter
LEGISLATION CITED: Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997
Firearms Act 1996
CASES CITED: Aubrey v Commissioner of Police [2005] NSWADT 266
Brosowski v Commissioner of Police [2003] NSWADT 182
Commissioner of Police v Toleafoa [1999] NSWADTAP 9
May v Commissioner of Police [2001] NSWADT 82
Ward v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2000] NSWADT 28
REPRESENTATION:

APPLICANT
L Allan, agent

RESPONDENT
K Mattes, solicitor
ORDERS: The decision under review is affirmed.


1 This is an application by Mr Allan for review of a decision of the Commissioner of Police, NSW Police ("the Commissioner"), to revoke Mr Allan's Class AB licence under the Firearms Act 1996 (“the Act”).

Background

2 The background to this application is not in dispute. Mr Allan gave evidence that he has had a firearms licence for approximately thirty years. His Category AB licence was issued to him on 28 January 1999 and renewed on 5 February 2004. This renewal was due to expire on 5 February 2009.

3 The "genuine reason" nominated in the application was "recreational hunting/vermin control". Mr Allan explained that his cousin has given him permission to shoot on his property.

4 In his application for renewal in 2004, Mr Allan disclosed that he had suffered a "slight nervous condition ...since being unemployed" which he was controlling with medication. At the request of the Firearms Registry Mr Allan obtained a medical assessment from Dr Toni Kesby in May 2004. Dr Kesby stated that in July 2003 Mr Allan had been diagnosed as having Paranoid Personality Disorder with depression. The condition had stabilised on medication. Dr Kesby indicated her belief that Mr Allan would be able to exercise continuous and responsible control over firearms.

5 On 12 May 2007 Police officers were called to attend an incident at Mr Allan's property. The police were advised that in a telephone call with his brother, Mr Allan had threatened to harm himself by "blowing his head off". He admitted to police that he was going to shoot himself, and also threatened to shoot his next-door neighbour.

6 Police seized Mr Allan's firearms and Mr Allan was admitted to the Mental Health section of Maitland Hospital. As a result of the incident, the Commissioner suspended Mr Allan's firearms licence. Mr Allan was asked to obtain a report from a registered psychologist or psychiatrist to enable the Firearms Registry to assess his suitability to continue to hold a firearms licence.

7 In a report dated 22 June 2007,15 Dr Artin Jebejian of Hunter New England Mental Health advised that:

          Mr Allan had been admitted to the Maitland Mental Health Unit due to threats of harm to himself and others with a…

Continue reading Allan v Commissioner of Police

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Allan v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police [2008] NSWADT 230
Case
[2008] NSWADT 230
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Allan v Commissioner of Police was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The appellant, Mr Allan, challenged the decision of the respondent, the Commissioner of Police, to revoke his firearm licence. Mr Allan argued that the decision was unreasonable and that he had not been given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations against him. The Commissioner defended the decision, asserting that Mr Allan had breached the conditions of his licence, which warranted revocation.

The central legal issue in this case was whether the Commissioner's decision to revoke Mr Allan's firearm licence was lawful and reasonable. This involved examining the procedural fairness afforded to Mr Allan, as well as whether the decision was supported by sufficient evidence. Additionally, the court considered whether the decision was within the statutory powers of the Commissioner.

The court found that the Commissioner's decision to revoke Mr Allan's firearm licence was both lawful and reasonable. The court held that Mr Allan had been given adequate procedural fairness, as he had been informed of the allegations and provided with an opportunity to respond. The court also found that the evidence supported the Commissioner's decision, as Mr Allan had indeed breached the conditions of his licence. Consequently, the court affirmed the decision under review, upholding the Commissioner's right to revoke Mr Allan's firearm licence.

Orders

Orders of the court

The decision under review is affirmed.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.