Dyas v Director-General, Fair Trading and Commissioner of Police

In the case of Dyas v Director-General, Fair Trading and Commissioner of Police, the primary issue was whether the Director-General of Fair Trading had the legal authority to deny a tattoo parlour licence based on the applicant's previous criminal convictions. The applicant sought judicial review of the Director-General's decision to refuse the licence, arguing that the decision was unreasonable and that the Director-General did not have the power to consider the applicant's past criminal history in this context.

The court examined the statutory framework governing tattoo parlour licences and the criteria for determining whether an applicant is a fit and proper person. The central legal questions were whether the Director-General's consideration of the applicant's criminal history was within the scope of the statutory powers and whether the decision was unreasonable. The court held that the Director-General had acted outside the statutory authority by considering the applicant's criminal history, which was not relevant to the fitness and propriety criteria for the tattoo licence. The court found the decision to be unreasonable as it was based on an irrelevant factor and not in line with the statutory objectives.

Consequently, the court set aside the Director-General's decision and substituted it with a decision to grant the tattoo parlour licence. The court emphasised the importance of adhering to statutory mandates and ensuring that decisions are based on relevant and appropriate considerations. The final order was that the decision under review be set aside and replaced with a decision granting the licence to the applicant.