Balodis v Registrar of Firearms

[2018] SASC 190

SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA

(Civil: Permission to Appeal in Private)

BALODIS v REGISTRAR OF FIREARMS

[2018] SASC 190

Reasons for Decision of The Honourable Justice Bampton

14 December 2018

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS - SOUTH AUSTRALIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

FIRE, EXPLOSIVES AND FIREARMS - FIREARMS - LICENCES AND RELATED MATTERS - LICENCES - ISSUE OF AND GENERALLY

Application for permission to appeal against a decision of the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal – where Master refused permission to appeal – where application renewed to a Judge, but out of time – whether permission to appeal should be granted.

Held: application dismissed.

South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (SA) s 71(2); Supreme Court Civil Rules 2006 (SA) r 292(5), referred to.

BALODIS v REGISTRAR OF FIREARMS
[2018] SASC 190

Civil:  Application for permission to appeal in private

1. BAMPTON J:      Mr Balodis made application to the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (“SACAT”) for review of the Registrar of Firearms’ (“the Registrar”) refusal to grant him a firearms licence.  A delegate of the Registrar had determined on 18 January 2018 that Mr Balodis was not a fit and proper person to hold a firearms licence.  Having reviewed the matter, an Executive Senior Member of SACAT determined on 16 April 2018 that Mr Balodis was not a fit and proper person to hold a firearms licence and that the Registrar was correct to refuse the grant of the licence (“the SACAT decision”).

2. Mr Balodis made application to a Master of the Supreme Court seeking permission to appeal the SACAT decision pursuant to s 71(2) of the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (SA).

3. On 5 September 2018, a Master of the Supreme Court delivered reasons for refusing Mr Balodis permission to appeal.[1]  The Master determined that Mr Balodis advanced no reasonable arguable basis on which the Court could find that the Executive Senior Member of SACAT had erred in his review of the Registrar’s refusal to grant Mr Balodis a firearms licence.

   [1]    Balodis v Registrar of Firearms [2018] SASC 126.

4. Rule 292(5) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules 2006 (SA) provides that Mr Balodis may renew his application for permission to appeal to a single Judge of the Supreme Court by commencing an appeal within five days after the refusal by the Master and including in the notice of appeal a request for the necessary permission.  Mr Balodis filed a document (FDN 5) on 23 October 2018 attaching his original notice of appeal seeking permission to appeal to the Full Court.  This renewed application for permission was filed out of time.  Mr Balodis said in support of an extension of time:

   As I live in the country, I only come into the city once a fortnight (approx) and as I am prehistoric, I can only deliver paperwork on that day.  Please understand my reason (old fashioned).

5. I have considered this matter in Chambers having regard to the documents filed by Mr Balodis, the SACAT decision and the Master’s decision.  Mr Balodis has not identified any reasonable grounds of appeal warranting permission to appeal.  In other words, Mr Balodis has not identified any arguable error by the Executive Senior Member of SACAT in his review of the Registrar’s decision.  As such, I decline to extend the time within which to apply for permission to appeal to the Full Court.

6. I dismiss the application.