AVS Group of Companies Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Police

The dispute in *AVS Group of Companies Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Police* concerned an application for a stay of a decision by the Commissioner of Police to revoke a security industry licence. The applicant, AVS Group of Companies Pty Ltd, sought to prevent the immediate effect of the revocation pending a full review of the decision by the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. The Commissioner of Police opposed the application, arguing that the Tribunal lacked the power to grant the specific relief sought. The matter came before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the Administrative Decisions Tribunal had the power under section 60(2) of the *Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997* (NSW) to make an order temporarily reversing a decision under review, or whether its power was limited to granting a stay of the operation of that decision. This distinction was critical because the applicant sought an order that would effectively prevent the revocation from taking effect, which they argued was more than a mere stay. A further issue involved the interpretation of section 29(3) of the *Security Industry Act 1997* (NSW) concerning the disclosure of "criminal intelligence reports" and whether the Tribunal's obligation to prevent disclosure applied to the hearing of a stay application.

The Court of Appeal considered the nature of the Commissioner's decision to revoke the licence and the effect of section 6(1)(c) of the *Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act*. The Court reasoned that the "decision" that could be the subject of appeal was the revocation itself, not the preceding mental processes. Therefore, a stay of the decision meant a stay of the revocation. The Court distinguished this from situations where a tribunal order is followed by a separate act giving effect to it. The Court's analysis focused on the statutory language and the purposive approach to statutory interpretation, particularly in relation to potential derogations from procedural fairness.

The Court of Appeal ultimately held that the Tribunal's power under section 60(2) was limited to granting a stay of the operation of the decision, and it did not possess the power to temporarily reverse the decision under review. Consequently, the application for an order temporarily reversing the revocation was dismissed.