Harley v Department of Justice and Attorney-General

In the matter of Harley v Department of Justice and Attorney-General, the court was asked to review the decision of the Department to cancel the crowd controller’s licence of Mr Harley, a security provider. The cancellation followed an incident at Mr Harley's workplace where a patron became intoxicated, aggressive, and verbally abusive. Mr Harley, who had been in the industry for a number of years with no previous infringements, dealt with the situation for an extended period after the patron was excluded from the venue. Mr Harley believed he was about to be assaulted and acted in pre-emptive self-defence, an action supported by an independent observer.

The legal issues before the court were whether the Department's decision to cancel Mr Harley’s licence was lawful, and whether the decision was based on relevant and irrelevant considerations. The court was required to determine if the Department had acted in a manner that was unreasonable, unjust, or improperly exercised its powers. A key point of contention was whether the controller’s belief of imminent assault justified his actions, and whether the decision to cancel the licence was disproportionate.

The court found that the Department’s decision to cancel Mr Harley’s licence was not supported by the evidence and was therefore unlawful. The controller’s belief that he was about to be assaulted was reasonable given the circumstances, and his actions were in response to a perceived threat. The court noted that Mr Harley had no previous infringements and had numerous references supporting his reputation as a highly regarded crowd controller. The court concluded that the Department’s decision was unreasonable and not based on proper consideration of the evidence. As a result, the decision to cancel Mr Harley’s licence was set aside, and his licence was reinstated.