Padraic Gibson (on behalf of the Dungay family) v Commissioner of Police (NSW Police Force)

Padraic Gibson, acting on behalf of the Dungay family, appealed to the Supreme Court of New South Wales against an order prohibiting a proposed public assembly. The Commissioner of Police (NSW Police Force) was the respondent. The core of the dispute concerned the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to entertain applications related to public assemblies under the *Summary Offences Act 1988* (NSW), particularly when the Commissioner was alleged to have failed to follow the prescribed procedural steps.

The legal issues before the Court were twofold. Firstly, it had to determine whether the Supreme Court possessed jurisdiction to hear an application to prohibit a proposed public assembly, even if the Commissioner of Police had not strictly complied with the procedural requirements outlined in section 25(2) of the *Summary Offences Act 1988*. Secondly, the Court was required to consider whether an appeal lay to the Supreme Court from an order prohibiting a public assembly, notwithstanding the statutory limitations on appeals found within the *Summary Offences Act 1988*.

The Court reasoned that section 25(1) of the *Summary Offences Act 1988* pertains to the making of an application to prohibit a public assembly, whereas section 25(2) deals with the procedural steps to be followed once such an application is made. The Court concluded that the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to entertain an application to prohibit a public assembly was not contingent upon the Commissioner's prior compliance with the procedural requirements of section 25(2). The Court's analysis focused on the distinction between the initiation of an application and the subsequent procedural steps.