Purdie v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2017] NSWCATAD 38

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Purdie v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2017] NSWCATAD 38 Hearing dates: 17 August 2016 and 31 August 2016 Date of orders: 23 January 2017 Decision date: 23 January 2017 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: R Perrignon, Senior Member Decision: The decision under review is affirmed. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – review of decision to decline the grant of a tattoo parlour licence – adverse security determination by Commissioner of Police – what is the correct and preferable decision in relation to the licence application Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Tattoo Parlours Act 2012 Cases Cited: Comalco Aluminium (Bell Jay) Limited v O'Connor and Others (1985) 131 ALR 657 Constantin v Commission of Police, NSW Police Force (GD) [2013] NSWADTAP 16 Dyas v Director-General Fair Trading & Anor [2014] NSWCATAD 223 McKinnon v Department of Treasury (2005) FCAFC 142Smith v Commissioner of Police & Anor [2014] NSWCATAD 184 Zahra v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force & Anor [2014] NSWCATAD 211 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Kathleen Jane Purdie (Applicant) Commissioner for Fair Trading (First Respondent) Commissioner of Police (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: H El-Hage (Respondents)

Solicitors: Otto Stichter & Associates (Applicant) Crown Solicitors Office (Respondents) File Number(s): 1610420 Publication restriction: (1) The disclosure, publication or broadcast of paragraphs 64 to 84 inclusive of the reasons for decision is prohibited, except to the Second Respondent.(2) The disclosure, publication or broadcast of any oral or written evidence or submissions lodged with, or given to, the Tribunal in confidence is prohibited, except to the Second Respondent.