NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Whalan v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2018] NSWCATAD 87 Hearing dates: 9 April 2018 Date of orders: 19 April 2018 Decision date: 19 April 2018 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: C Ludlow, Senior Member Decision: 1. The decision under review is affirmed. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – merits review - firearms licence – refusal of licence – fit and proper person – public interest Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) Firearms Regulation 2017 (NSW) Firearms Regulation 2006 (NSW) Cases Cited: Commissioner of Police v Toleafoa [1999] NSWADTAP 9 Constantin v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force (GD) [2013] NSWADTAP 16 Hughes and Vale Pty Ltd v New South Wales (No.2) [1955] HCA 28 Ward v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Service [2000] NSWADT 28 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Prudence Heather Whalan (Applicant) Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force (Respondent) Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors: Lindsay Taylor Lawyers (Respondent) File Number(s): 2017/313391
REASONS FOR DECISION
Background 1. This is an application for review of a decision by the respondent to refuse an application for a firearms licence under the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW). 2. The applicant applied for a personal firearms licence on 30 November 2016. The reasons given for the licence were recreational hunting/ vermin control and firearms collection. The categories applied for were Categories A and B in respect of the hunting and vermin control and Categories A, B, C, D and H in respect of firearms collection. 3. The application was refused on the grounds that the Commissioner was not satisfied that the applicant was a fit and proper person and could be trusted to have possession of firearms without danger to public safety or to the peace (s11(3)(a) Firearms Act) and that the Commissioner considered that issue of the licence would be contrary to the public interest (s 11(7)). 4. On internal review the original decision was affirmed on the same grounds.
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