NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: DZV v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2020] NSWCATAD 54 Hearing dates: 9 September 2019 Date of orders: 14 February 2020 Decision date: 14 February 2020 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: K Ransome, Senior Member Decision: 1. The decision under review is affirmed. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – administrative review – revocation of firearms licence – failure to ensure safekeeping of firearms – relevance of past conduct of applicant's husband – whether condition should be imposed on licence – whether not in the public interest for applicant to hold a licence Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 Firearms Act 1996 Firearms Regulation 2017 Cases Cited: AML v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2013] NSWADT 5 Brosowski v Commissioner of Police [2003] NSWADT 182 Comalco Aluminium (Bell Bay) Ltd v O'Connor and Others (1995) ALR 657 Commissioner of Police v Toleafoa [1999] NSWADTAP 9 Cook v Commissioner of Police [2003] NSWADT 30 Cusumano v Commissioner of Police [2001] NSWADT 50 Kavalieratos v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2014] NSWCATAD 117 Kopco v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2018] NSWCATAD 124 Laing v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2017] NSWCATAD 315 Martin v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Force [2017] NSWCATAD 97 Masterson v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales [2017] NSWCATAP 206 Tolley v Commissioner of Police [2006] NSWADT 149 Ward v Commissioner of Police [2000] NSWADT 28 Wiltshire v Commissioner of Police [2005] NSWADT 75 Category: Principal judgment Parties: DZV (Applicant) Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force (Respondent) Representation: Applicant in person R Coffey, (Counsel for the Respondent) Office of General Council, NSW Police Force,(Respondent) File Number(s): 2019/00079425 Publication restriction: Section 64 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 applies to the material filed by the respondents on a confidential basis, to those paragraphs of these reasons identified as [Not for publication], to the evidence given in private before the Tribunal and to the record of that part of the proceedings conducted in private pursuant to s 49. That material is not to be released to either the applicant or to the public. Also pursuant to s 64 any information which could disclose the identity of the applicant is not to be released to the public.
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