Henney v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2018] NSWCATAD 174

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Henney v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2018] NSWCATAD 174 Hearing dates: 26 April 2018 Date of orders: 07 August 2018 Decision date: 07 August 2018 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: S Thode, Senior Member Decision: (1) The decision under review is affirmed. Catchwords: FIREARMS - prohibited weapon – silencer – genuine reason – meaning of necessary - whether vermin control is a genuine reason contemplated by the Act Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) Weapons Prohibition Act 1998 (NSW) Cases Cited: Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force v Allen [2016] NSWCATAP 148 Marando v Commissioner of Police [2018] NSWCATAD 29 Thompson v Judge Byrne (1999) 196 CLR 14 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Philip Neil Henney (Applicant) Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: H El-Hage (Respondent)

Solicitors: NSW Crown Solicitors Office (Respondent)

In Person (Applicant) File Number(s): 2018/00006958 Publication restriction: Nil

reasons for decision

Background 1. Mr Henney is a 54 year old man who resides predominantly in Picton on a small acreage with his family. In 2017 the Applicant purchased a 110 acre property near Maragle (the property). The Applicant keeps between 10 and 20 head of cattle on the property. 2. Mr Henney has held a Category AB firearms since November 2008, valid to 25 November 2018, issued for the genuine reasons of Target Shooting and Recreational Hunting/Vermin Control. On 22 November 2017, Category H was added to that licence for target shooting purposes. 3. On 16 March 2016 Mr Henney lodged an application for a "General Prohibited Weapon (Silencer) Permit" seeking authorisation for the use of a silencer for recreational/sporting purposes. 4. The application was refused on 8 August 2017 on the grounds that genuine reasons were not demonstrated. 5. On 23 August 2017 the Applicant lodged an internal review stating that due to a change in circumstance, the need for a silencer was changed to business/employment purposes for vertebrate pest animal control. 6. On 11 December 2017 the Commissioner decided to refuse the application for internal review. The Commissioner provided the following conclusion: "I accept you are of good character, and possession and use of a silencer may be desirable to you. However, I believe the granting of your application does not accord with either the principles and objects of the Act, or Parliament's intended strict controls on access to prohibited articles. As a result, I believe the Commissioner's decision was preferable."