Mahoney v Commissioner of Police

The case of Mahoney v Commissioner of Police involved the applicant, seeking the issuance of a category AB firearms licence, challenging the decision of the respondent to revoke their existing licence. The dispute was heard in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT). The applicant argued that the revocation of their firearms licence was unreasonable and not supported by the evidence, particularly given the medical reports that were provided.

The primary legal issues before the tribunal were whether the decision to revoke the applicant’s firearms licence was lawful, reasonable and whether the decision-maker properly considered the relevant evidence, including the medical reports. The tribunal had to determine whether the respondent had acted within their statutory powers and whether the decision was based on proper consideration of the evidence.

The tribunal found that the decision to revoke the applicant's licence was not supported by the evidence and was therefore unlawful. The tribunal noted that the respondent had failed to properly consider the medical reports, which indicated that the applicant was fit to hold a firearms licence. The tribunal held that the respondent’s decision was unreasonable and not in accordance with the relevant legislation. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the decision to revoke the licence and ordered that a category AB firearms licence be issued to the applicant.