Dunbar v Commissioner of Police

The case of Dunbar v Commissioner of Police involved the applicant, Dunbar, challenging the revocation of his security agent licence by the Commissioner of Police. The revocation was made in accordance with the Security and Investigative Agents Act. Dunbar applied for a review of this decision, seeking a declaration that the revocation should not have been made, due to the significant delay in the review process, which caused his licences to expire. The court had to determine whether the review proceedings were substantive and served a practical or legal purpose, given that the licences had already expired.

The court considered whether the delay in the review proceedings rendered the proceedings lacking in substance. It examined the legal principles surrounding the timeliness of judicial review and the effect of the expiry of the licences on the substantive nature of the proceedings. The court also assessed whether the delay negated any potential legal or practical purpose of the review.

After thorough examination, the court concluded that the lengthy delay until the review proceedings were dealt with meant that the licences had already expired by the time the review was conducted. Consequently, the proceedings were considered to lack substance, as the outcome could not affect the applicant’s entitlement to hold the licences. The court found that the proceedings did not serve any practical or legal purpose, and therefore, the application was dismissed.

The dismissal of the application resulted in the applicant’s claim for a declaration that the revocation decision should not have been made being rejected. The court held that the review proceedings, delayed significantly, did not have the requisite substance to yield any meaningful outcome for the applicant.