NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Gomes v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2017] NSWCATAD 169 Hearing dates: 22 February 2017 Date of orders: 26 May 2017 Decision date: 26 May 2017 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: DAC Robertson, Senior Member Decision: In proceedings 1610569: (1) The decision under review is affirmed. (2) Order pursuant to s64(1)(d) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act prohibiting the disclosure to the applicant of: (a) Exhibits E and F tendered by the respondent; (b) Those parts of the record of hearing and any transcript of those parts of the hearing which took place in the absence of the applicant and his representative as identified orally in the course of the hearing; (c) The confidential submission on behalf of the Commissioner of Police dated 2 March 2017.
In proceedings 1610570: (1) The decision under review is affirmed. (2) Order pursuant to s64(1)(d) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act prohibiting the disclosure to the applicant of: (a) Exhibits E and F tendered by the respondent; (b) Those parts of the record of hearing and any transcript of those parts of the hearing which took place in the absence of the applicant and his representative as identified orally in the course of the hearing; (c) The confidential submission on behalf of the Commissioner of Police dated 2 March 2017. Catchwords: Firearms Act – firearms licence – refusal of licence – whether applicants fit and proper persons – public interest Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) Cases Cited: Kocic v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force (2014) 88 NSWLR 159 Martin v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2010] NSWADT 276 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Antonio Gomes (Applicant 1610569) Justin Gomes(Applicant 1610570) Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: G Kable (Applicants) R Bhalla (Respondent)
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