NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Stuart v O'Connor as Acting Deputy Secretary of the Department of Justice and State of New South Wales [2016] NSWSC 1179 Hearing dates: 15 August 2016 Decision date: 25 August 2016 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: N Adams J Decision: (1) Declare that sub-clauses 53Y(1)(d) and 53Z(1)(d) of the Liquor Regulation 2008 (NSW) are ultra vires. (2) Declare that the decision of the first defendant on 19 July 2016, in his capacity as delegate of the Secretary of the Department of Justice, to declare the "Smoking Panda Bar" area of the Coronation Hotel to be CBD subject premises for the purposes of clauses 53Y and 53Z of the Liquor Regulation 2008 (NSW) is invalid. (3) The second defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – "lockout laws" - declarations sought - whether improper subdelegation of regulation-making power by cls 53Y(1)(d) and 53Z(1)(d) of the Liquor Regulation 2008 – whether cls 53Y(1)(d) and 53Z(1)(d) ultra vires – construction of s 116I of the Liquor Act 2007
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - whether decision of the first defendant unreasonable – whether decision made for an improper purpose – unnecessary to consider ground Legislation Cited: Customs Act 1900 (Cth), ss 50, 229(1) Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 (Cth), reg 4(1) and Sch 2 Gaming and Liquor Administration Act 2007 (NSW), s 36A Liquor Act 2007 (NSW), ss 3, 4, 12(1)(a)(i), 54, 80(7)(a), 116B, 116E, 116F, 116G, 116H(1), 116I, 136F(6), 159 Liquor Amendment Act 2014 (NSW) Liquor Amendment (Sydney CBD Entertainment Precinct) Regulation 2014 (NSW) Liquor Regulation 2008 (NSW), cls 53B, 53X, 53Y, 53Z, 53ZE Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), ss 69, 75 Work Health Regulations 2000 (NT), reg 3A(3) Cases Cited: Clarke v Elias [2008] VSC 427 Commonwealth v Grunseit (1943) 67 CLR 58 Dainford Ltd v Smith (1985) 155 CLR 342 Grunt Labour Services Pty Ltd v Work Health Authority [2006] NTSC 6 McEldowney v Forde [1969] 2 All ER 1039 Minister for Immigration v Li (2013) 249 CLR 332 O'Connell v Nixon [2006] 16 VR 440 O'Reilly v State Bank of Victoria Commissioners (1983) 153 CLR 1 Racecourse Co-operative Sugar Association Ltd v Attorney-General (Qld) (1979) 142 CLR 460 R & R Fazzolari Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council (2009) 237 CLR 603 Thompson v Corporation of the Municipality of Randwick (1950) 81 CLR 87 Turner v Owen (1990) 26 FCR 366 Vanstone v Clark (2005) 147 FCR 299 Western Australian Planning Commission v Temwood Holdings Pty Ltd (2001) 221 CLR 30; [2001] HCA 63 Texts Cited: Dennis Pearce and Stephen Argument, Delegated Legislation in Australia (LexisNexis Butterworths, 4th ed, 2012) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Robert Arthur Preston Stuart (Plaintiff) Feargus O'Connor as Acting Deputy Secretary of the Department of Justice (First Defendant) State of New South Wales (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Mr C Birch SC (Plaintiff) Ms Z Heger (Second Defendant)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate