Unified Security Group (Australia) Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Police (No 2) [2021] NSWCATOD 226

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Unified Security Group (Australia) Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Police (No 2) [2021] NSWCATOD 226 Hearing dates: 30 March 2021; 26 April 2021 Date of orders: 7 May 2021 Decision date: 07 May 2021 Jurisdiction: Occupational Division Before: L Pearson, Principal Member Decision: (1) The operation of the decision of the Commissioner of Police to revoke the Master Security Licence 410068657 issued to Unified Security Group (Australia) Pty Ltd is stayed until determination of the application for review or until further order of the Tribunal, subject to the following conditions: (a) That Luigi Trunzo and David Millward will not: (i) Hold any relevant financial interest in the business of the Applicant; (ii) Be entitled to exercise any relevant power (whether in his own right or on behalf of any other person), in the business of the Applicant; (iii) Exercise a significant influence over or with respect to the conduct of the business of the Applicant; or (iv) Hold any relevant position, whether in his own right or on behalf of any other person, in the business of the Applicant. For the purposes of this condition, the terms 'relevant financial interest', 'relevant power' and 'significant influence' have the same meaning as the equivalent terms in section 5 of the Security Industry Act 1997. (b) That all employees of the Applicant used to provide a security activity hold a current Class 1 or Class 2 Security Licence; (c) That all subcontractors providing services on behalf of the Applicant hold a Master Licence; (d) That the Applicant will provide a 'security activity' (within the meaning of s 4 of the Security Industry Act) to a client through the use of subcontractors only in circumstances where the Applicant has obtained the written consent of the relevant client to the use of the nominated subcontractors. (2) Pursuant to s 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, publication of: (a) evidence or matters in documents exhibits R1, R2, R7, R8, and tabs 2 and 3 in exhibit R12, and documents MFI 1, MFI 2, and MFI 3, and (b) evidence given in private session on 26 April 2021 subject to an order under s 49 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, is prohibited. Catchwords: INTERLOCUTORY ORDER – revocation of security licence – application for stay Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997(NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) Security Industry Act 1997 (NSW) Security Industry Regulation 2016 (NSW) Cases Cited: AVS Group of Companies Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Police [2010] NSWCA 81 Coulthart v Commissioner of Police [2016] NSWCATAD 297 Loveday v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2018] NSWCATAD 80 QLD Protection Security Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2018] NSWCATAP 113 Re Pelling and Secretary, Department of Aviation [1984] AATA 179; (1984) 5 ALD 638 Texts Cited: Nil Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Unified Security Group (Australia) Pty Ltd (Applicant) Commissioner of Police (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: M Robinson SC with J Alderson (Applicant) C Mantziaris (Respondent)