Allen v Commissioner for Fair Trading

In the case of Allen v Commissioner for Fair Tattooing, the appellant sought judicial review of a decision by the Commissioner for Fair Trading to refuse a tattooist's licence on the basis that he was not a fit and proper person. The appellant's criminal history was a significant factor in the decision. The matter was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The appellant argued that the Commissioner failed to consider certain evidence and acted without proper procedural fairness.

The primary issue before the court was whether the Commissioner had correctly assessed the appellant's fitness to hold a tattooist's licence. This involved examining whether the Commissioner appropriately considered the confidential evidence provided and whether the decision-making process adhered to the principles of procedural fairness. Additionally, the court had to determine the appropriate weight to be given to the appellant's criminal history in assessing his suitability.

The court found that the Commissioner had properly considered the appellant's criminal history and that the decision was not influenced by any improper considerations. The court held that the confidential evidence, while relevant, did not alter the overall assessment of the appellant's fitness to hold a tattooist's licence. The court also determined that the decision-making process was fair and in accordance with the relevant statutory requirements. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the decision under review was affirmed.