Whalley v Commissioner of Police [2003] NSWSC 273

Whalley v Commissioner of Police [2003] NSWSC 273

Practice Note 119 was valid and the Court had power to direct the provision of reasons, but the direction was not appropriate because the Commissioner's decision-making process and reasons had already been sufficiently disclosed through the Peterson submission, its attachments and related material; any grounds for relief would be found in that material, and a further statement of reasons would add nothing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 April 2003
Procedural Posture
Administrative Law Proceedings Seeking Declaratory and Prerogative Relief / Application for an Order Under Practice Note 119 Requiring Reasons for Decision
Outcome
Application for reasons for decision refused.
Legal Topics
['administrative Law List' 'practice Note No. 119' 'power to Order Decision Maker to Provide Reasons' 'validity of Practice Note' 'police Secondary Employment Approval']
['administrative Law' 'courts Practice and Procedure'] ['administrative Law List' 'practice Note No. 119' 'power to Order Decision Maker to Provide Reasons' 'validity of Practice Note' 'police Secondary Employment Approval']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Administrative Law Proceedings Seeking Declaratory and Prerogative Relief / Application for an Order Under Practice Note 119 Requiring Reasons for Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the relevant provisions of Practice Note 119 were valid and authorised the Court to direct a public decision-maker to provide reasons for a challenged decision.' 'Whether, in the circumstances, the Commissioner of Police should be directed to furnish reasons for refusing approval for the plaintiffs to engage in secondary employment.']

Ratio Decidendi

Practice Note 119 was valid and the Court had power to direct the provision of reasons, but the direction was not appropriate because the Commissioner's decision-making process and reasons had already been sufficiently disclosed through the Peterson submission, its attachments and related material; any grounds for relief would be found in that material, and a further statement of reasons would add nothing.

Court Disposition

Application for reasons for decision refused.

Orders

  • ['No order as to the costs of the application.']