Pollard v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force

In the matter of Pollard v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force, the applicant, Mr Pollard, sought administrative review of a decision by the respondent to revoke his firearms licence. The respondent, the NSW Police Force, applied for an order under section 59 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997, seeking to avoid disclosing a confidential document to Mr Pollard. The respondent also sought non-publication and non-disclosure orders, intending to rely on the confidential document without disclosing it to Mr Pollard. The central legal issue was whether the respondent's application for an order under section 59 was misconceived, given the potential revelation of a confidential source of information.

The court examined whether the respondent's application was misconceived, considering that the respondent intended to rely on the confidential document but not disclose it to Mr Pollard. The court also addressed the timeliness of Mr Pollard's application, which was lodged out of time due to the respondent's failure to conduct an internal review within the statutory period. The respondent did not object to the extension of time for Mr Pollard's application. The court concluded that the respondent's application for the section 59 order was misconceived because it sought to rely on the confidential document without disclosing it, which was not permissible under the Act.

The court granted an extension of time for Mr Pollard to lodge his application to the Tribunal for administrative review, setting the new deadline as 3 June 2021. The court also prohibited the disclosure and publication of the respondent's confidential submissions, the confidential statement of Nigel Turney, and the information report filed in accordance with a previous order, in line with sections 64(1)(d) and 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW). The respondent's application under section 59 was scheduled to be determined at the hearing on 19 August 2021.