Civil and Administrative Tribunal
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Hughes v Commissioner of Police [2022] NSWCATAD 219 Hearing dates: 10 May 2021, 3 June 2021, 20 December 2021, 1 March 2022. Date of orders: 1 July 2022 Decision date: 01 July 2022 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: D Dinnen, Senior Member Decision: (1) The Respondent’s decision to revoke the Applicant’s Category AB firearms licence is affirmed.
(2) The confidentiality orders made 3 June 2021 are continued.
Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW - firearms – revocation of licence – Safe storage requirements – non compliance with regulatory scheme - risk to public safety – public interest.
Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013
Firearms Act 1996
Firearms Regulation 2017
Cases Cited: AML v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2013] NSWADT 5
Barlow v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2003] NSWADT 254
Bladen v NSW Commissioner of Police [2015] NSWCATAD 240
CIC Insurance Limited v Bankstown Football Club (1997) 187 CLR 384
Comalco Aluminium (Bell Bay) Ltd v O’Connor and Others (1995) 131 ALR 657
Commissioner of Police v Toleafoa [1999] NSWADTAP 9
Constantin v Commissioner of Police [2013] NSWADTAP 16
Cusumano v Commissioner of Police [2001] NSWADT 50
Davos v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2013] NSWADT 7
Director of Public Prosecutions v Smith (1991) 1 VR 63
Drake v Minister of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1970) 2 ALD 60
Hill v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Service [2002] NSWADT 218 at [24]
Hoffman v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2003] NSWADT 89
Kocic v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2014] NSWCA 368
Lynch v Commissioner of Police (GD) [2006] NSWADTAP 43
Martin v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2017] NSWCATAD 97
Martin v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2010] NSWADT 276
Masterson v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2017] NSWCATAP 206
Morris v The Commissioner of Police [2002] NSWADT 223
Petas v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2013] NSWADT 137
Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355
Texts Cited: None cited
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Kevin Hughes (Applicant)
Commissioner of Police (Respondent)Representation: Solicitors:
Applicant (Self Represented)
Maddocks Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2021/00057841 Publication restriction: Paragraphs 46 and 78: not for publication pursuant to s 64(c) and 64(d) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013
REASONS FOR DECISION
Background
-
Kevin Hughes (the Applicant) was first issued with a Category AB Firearms Licence on 21 September 2017, for the genuine reason of ‘sport/target shooting’ and ‘recreational hunting/vermin control’. In his licence application, the Applicant supported his genuine reason of recreational hunting/vermin control with permission from an owner of rural land.
-
The Respondent is responsible for assessing applications put to it for licences to possess and use firearms under the Act, and…
Continue reading Hughes v Commissioner of Police
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Hughes v Commissioner of Police [2022] NSWCATAD 219
- Case
- [2022] NSWCATAD 219
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue the court had to address was whether the Commissioner's decision to revoke Mr Hughes' firearms licence was lawful, reasonable, and justified under the relevant legislative framework. The applicant argued that the decision was not supported by the evidence and was therefore irrational or unjust. The court had to consider the statutory provisions governing firearms licences, the evidence presented regarding Mr Hughes' non-compliance, and the implications of such non-compliance on public safety.
In delivering the judgment, the court found that the Commissioner's decision was well within the bounds of the statutory authority and was based on a proper consideration of the relevant factors. The court held that the evidence demonstrated that Mr Hughes had not adhered to the safe storage requirements, which constituted a breach of the regulatory scheme. Furthermore, the court determined that the Commissioner's assessment of the risk to public safety posed by this non-compliance was reasonable and justified. Consequently, the court affirmed the Commissioner's decision to revoke the applicant's firearms licence, finding it to be lawful, reasonable, and within the scope of the statutory powers.
In addition to affirming the revocation of the firearms licence, the court also continued the confidentiality orders that had been made on 3 June 2021. These orders were maintained to protect sensitive information related to the case, ensuring that certain details remain undisclosed to the public. This aspect of the decision underscores the court's consideration of the broader implications of the case, including the need to balance the applicant's right to privacy with the public interest in the administration of justice.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) The Respondent’s decision to revoke the Applicant’s Category AB firearms licence is affirmed.
(2) The confidentiality orders made 3 June 2021 are continued.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.