Taylor v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force

Case [2025] NSWCATAD 257

Civil and Administrative Tribunal


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Taylor v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2025] NSWCATAD 257
Hearing dates: 13 October 2025
Date of orders: 21 October 2025
Decision date: 21 October 2025
Jurisdiction:Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before: Emeritus Prof G D Walker, Senior Member
Decision:

(1)   Decision under review affirmed.

(2) Pursuant to s 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act (CAT Act), the publication of the confidential material and confidential exhibit CR4, or matters contained in the confidential material and confidential exhibit CR4 is prohibited.

(3)   Pursuant to s 64(1)(d) of the CAT Act, the disclosure of the confidential material and confidential exhibit CR4, or matters contained in the confidential material and confidential exhibit CR4, is restricted to the Commissioner, the legal representatives for the Commissioner and the tribunal.

(4)   Pursuant to ss 64(1)(b), 64(1)(c) and 64(1)(d) of the CAT Act, the publication and recording of the confidential hearing of these proceedings, including confidential exhibit CR4 and any evidence given during the confidential hearing, is prohibited and the contents of all paragraphs in these reasons marked “[Not for publication]” are not to be published or released to the applicant.

Catchwords:

LICENSING – firearms licensing – licence refusal – public interest – criminal and traffic history – incorrect information in applications.

Legislation Cited:

Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)

Firearms Act 1996 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 316;

Bronze Wing International Pty Ltd v SafeWork New South Wales [2017] NSWCA 42;

Constantin v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2013] NSWADTAP 16;

Cusumano v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2001] NSWADT 50;

Drake v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1979) 2 ALD 60;

Esterman v Commissioner of Police [2014] NSWCATAD 70;

Hill v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2002] NSWADT 218;

Joseph v Commissioner of Police [2017] NSWCA 31;

Kavalieratos v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2014] NSWCATAD 117;

Keegan Jacques v Commissioner of Police [2017] NSWCATAD 145;

Kocic v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2014] NSWCA 368;

Martin v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2017] NSWCATAD 97

McDonald v Director-General, Social Security [1984] FCA 57, (1984) 1 FCR 354;

Nakad v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2014] NSWCATAP 10;

Sterjovski v Director-General, Department of Transport [2002] NSWADT 10;

Umbaca v Commissioner of Police [2021] NSWCATAD 380;

Webb v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2004] NSWADT 110

Category:Principal judgment
Parties:

Zachary B Taylor (Applicant)

Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force (Respondent)
Representation:

Applicant (self-represented)

Solicitors:
Hall and Wilcox (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2025/00193845
Publication restriction: See above.

reasons for decision

  1. The applicant Mr Zachary Taylor applied to this tribunal on 21 May 2025 for review of a decision…

Continue reading Taylor v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Forc...

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Taylor v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2025] NSWCATAD 257
Case
[2025] NSWCATAD 257
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Taylor v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force, the applicant sought review of the Commissioner's refusal to grant him a firearms licence. The applicant, Taylor, had submitted multiple applications for a firearms licence, all of which were declined by the Commissioner. Taylor's applications were rejected on the basis of his criminal and traffic history, and due to providing incorrect information in his applications. The matter was heard in the Civil and Administrative Tribunal (CAT) of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the Commissioner's refusal to grant the applicant a firearms licence was lawful and reasonable. The Tribunal had to consider the public interest factors outlined in the Firearms Act 1996, including the applicant's criminal and traffic history, and whether the applicant provided incorrect information in his applications. Additionally, the Tribunal had to determine whether the Commissioner's decision was based on an error of law or was otherwise unreasonable.

The Tribunal found that the Commissioner's decision to refuse the applicant a firearms licence was lawful and reasonable. The Tribunal noted that Taylor had a significant criminal and traffic history, and had provided incorrect information in his applications, which were substantial factors against granting a licence. The Tribunal held that the Commissioner's decision was based on a proper consideration of the relevant public interest factors and was not an error of law. The Tribunal also found that the confidential material and evidence presented during the hearing should not be published or disclosed to the applicant, in accordance with the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act.

The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner's decision to refuse the applicant a firearms licence and restricted the disclosure of confidential material and evidence presented during the hearing. The Tribunal further prohibited the publication and recording of the confidential hearing, including any evidence given during the hearing.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Decision under review affirmed.

(2) Pursuant to s 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act (CAT Act), the publication of the confidential material and confidential exhibit CR4, or matters contained in the confidential material and confidential exhibit CR4 is prohibited.

(3) Pursuant to s 64(1)(d) of the CAT Act, the disclosure of the confidential material and confidential exhibit CR4, or matters contained in the confidential material and confidential exhibit CR4, is restricted to the Commissioner, the legal representatives for the Commissioner and the tribunal.

(4) Pursuant to ss 64(1)(b), 64(1)(c) and 64(1)(d) of the CAT Act, the publication and recording of the confidential hearing of these proceedings, including confidential exhibit CR4 and any evidence given during the confidential hearing, is prohibited and the contents of all paragraphs in these reasons marked “[Not for publication]” are not to be published or released to the applicant.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.