McKenzie v Attorney General for New South Wales

In the case of McKenzie v Attorney General for New South Wales, the plaintiff sought judicial review of the decision to revoke his parole. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The central issue in the case was whether the decision to revoke the plaintiff's parole was legally sound and if the decision-maker had satisfied the necessary jurisdictional fact. This jurisdictional fact required the decision-maker to be satisfied that the parolee presented a danger to the community.

The court examined whether the decision-maker was required to conduct an inquiry or hearing before revoking the parole. It was also necessary to determine if the decision was legally unreasonable and whether any errors were apparent on the face of the record. Furthermore, the court needed to consider if the decision, made in September 2016, was out of time as per the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (NSW) rule 59.10. Lastly, the court had to decide if leave should be granted to proceed with the application for judicial review.

The court found that the decision to revoke the plaintiff's parole was legally unreasonable as the decision-maker failed to satisfy the required jurisdictional fact. The court held that the decision-maker should have conducted an inquiry or hearing before revoking the parole. The court also concluded that the error was disclosed on the face of the record and granted leave for the application for judicial review. The court ordered that the decision to revoke the plaintiff's parole be quashed, and the matter be remitted back to the original decision-maker for reconsideration in accordance with the law.