Woolworths Ltd v Director of Liquor Licensing

The case involved Woolworths Ltd, appealing a decision by the Director of Liquor Licensing, which refused their application for a liquor store licence. The refusal was made by the Liquor Commission, which assessed Woolworths' application under the Liquor Act 2007 (NSW). Woolworths argued that the Commission's refusal was an error of law, specifically a jurisdictional error that required reconsideration. The central issue before the court was whether the Commission's decision involved findings of primary fact, which would exempt it from judicial review, or whether it constituted a jurisdictional error warranting intervention.

The court was tasked with determining the scope of judicial review in cases of liquor licensing refusals and whether the Liquor Commission's decision was reviewable for errors of law. The court examined whether the Commission's decision involved findings of primary fact, which would place it outside the scope of judicial review. Alternatively, the court needed to assess whether the Commission's decision amounted to a jurisdictional error, which would allow for judicial intervention. The court also considered whether the Commission's decision was Wednesbury unreasonable, meaning it was so unreasonable that no reasonable body could have made it.

The court found that the Commission's decision involved findings of primary fact, which meant it was not subject to judicial review on the basis of an error of law. The court concluded that the Commission's decision did not constitute a jurisdictional error and was not Wednesbury unreasonable. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and Woolworths' application for a liquor store licence remained refused. The court held that the Commission's decision was within its jurisdiction and did not involve any legal error warranting judicial intervention.