Lawler v Queensland Police Service

The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal considered an appeal by Michael James Lawler against the refusal by the Queensland Police Service to renew his firearm’s licence. Lawler sought the licence for the purpose of sports and target shooting. The respondent argued that Lawler was not a fit and proper person to hold a licence and it was not in the public interest for him to hold a firearm’s licence, based on his criminal history and recent offences. Lawler argued that he had changed, evidenced by his business ownership, stable relationship and family, and there was no question over his mental health. The Tribunal had to determine if Lawler was a fit and proper person to hold a licence and if it was in the public interest for him to hold a firearm’s licence.

The Tribunal considered the principles underlying the Weapons Act 1990 (Qld), which place public and individual safety above weapon possession and use. The Act requires strict controls on weapon possession and the safe and secure storage and carriage of weapons. The Act also requires each person who wishes to possess a firearm under a licence to demonstrate a genuine reason for possessing the firearm. The Tribunal had to consider whether Lawler was a fit and proper person to hold a licence, considering factors such as mental and physical fitness, criminal history, and the public interest. The Tribunal had to balance the seriousness of Lawler’s past conduct and the weight to be given to matters favouring him, such as his business, family and friends who gave statements in his favour.

The Tribunal concluded that there was insufficient evidence to meet the high bar that Lawler must be a fit and proper person to hold a firearm’s licence. Although there were positive factors in Lawler’s favour, such as his business, family and friends who gave statements in his favour, the Tribunal was not satisfied that he had shown insight into his past conduct or that there was virtually no risk to public safety if he were given access to a firearm. The Tribunal also considered the public interest and concluded that it was not in the public interest for Lawler to hold a firearm’s licence because it could not be said that there was virtually no risk to the public.

The Tribunal confirmed the decision of the respondent made 29 March 2021, refusing to renew Lawler’s firearm’s licence. The Tribunal noted that Lawler could re-apply for a licence in March 2024.