Bahsa v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2019] NSWCATAD 17

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Bahsa v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2019] NSWCATAD 17 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 11 January 2019 Decision date: 11 January 2019 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: K Ransome, Senior Member Decision: (1) The application is dismissed. (2) The respondent's application for costs is dismissed. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Firearms Prohibition Order – disqualified person – offence "involving stalking or intimidation" – whether Tribunal has jurisdiction to review decision imposing Firearms Prohibition Order in relation to disqualified person Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 Firearms Act 1996 Cases Cited: Farah v Director-General, Department of Finance and Services [2014] NSWCATAP 23 Nguyen v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2018] NSWCATAD 242 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Abdullah Bahsa (Applicant) Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force (Respondent) Representation: Solicitors: Abbas & Co Lawyers (Applicant) Crown Solicitor's Office (Respondent) File Number(s): 2018/00273877 Publication restriction: Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION 1. The applicant, Mr Abdullah Bahsa, is seeking review of a decision made by the respondent, the Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force, to make a firearms prohibition order against him. The order was made on 14 May 2018 under s 73 of the Firearms Act 1996. The effect of a firearms prohibition order is to prevent a person from acquiring, possessing or using firearms. 2. Under s 75(1)(f) of the Firearms Act a person can apply to the Tribunal for an administrative review under the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 of a firearms prohibition order made against the person. There is, however, a qualification to that right of review contained in s 75(1A). That section provides: Despite subsection (1), a person may not apply for a review of a firearms prohibition order made against the person if the person would be required under section 11(5) or 29(3) to be refused a licence or permit (a disqualified person) had the person not been subject to a firearms prohibition order. 1. The Commissioner states that Mr Bahsa is a "disqualified person" within the meaning of the Firearms Act and the Tribunal therefore has no jurisdiction to review the decision to make a firearms prohibition order against him. The Commissioner states that this is because Mr Bahsa has been subject to two apprehended violence orders in the past 10 years and has been convicted of stalk/intimidate intend fear physical harm (domestic) offences within the last 10 years.