Masterson v Commissioner of Police

The case of Masterson v Commissioner of Police involved a challenge by the plaintiff against certain decisions made by the Commissioner of Police. The decisions in question related to the revocation of the plaintiff's firearms licence. The plaintiff sought to challenge the decisions despite them being no longer operative, arguing that the matter had significant public interest implications, particularly in the context of firearms legislation. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) had been influenced by material that was not formally tendered during the proceedings. The plaintiff argued that the Tribunal's decision was unreasonable as it appeared to have considered extraneous material. The court needed to determine whether this constituted a ground for judicial review and whether the Tribunal's decision was flawed due to the alleged influence of untendered material.

In examining the matter, the court noted that the plaintiff had not pursued the issue of alleged influence through cross-examination or submissions during the Tribunal's proceedings. The court held that the plaintiff's counsel had chosen not to object to the Tribunal's apparent consideration of untendered material and had instead focused on other grounds of challenge. The court concluded that the plaintiff's decision not to object at the Tribunal stage precluded the plaintiff from later arguing that the Tribunal's decision was unreasonable due to the influence of untendered material. The court found no question of law that warranted the grant of leave to appeal.

The court ultimately refused the plaintiff's application for leave to appeal. The reasoning and outcome of the case highlight the importance of objecting to procedural irregularities at the earliest opportunity to preserve the right to challenge such issues on appeal.