Mielczarek v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2016] NSWCATAP 217

The Appeal Panel refused the application to admit fresh evidence because it did not meet the strict requirement that the evidence would likely have produced a different result. Membership in the Rebels Motorcycle Club was only one factor, not the critical determinant in the decision to refuse the licence, and the appellant had the opportunity to cease membership before the first hearing.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 21 September 2016
Procedural Posture: Internal Appeal / Application to Adduce Fresh Evidence on Appeal
Outcome: application for admission of fresh evidence refused
Legal Topics: ['application to Adduce New Evidence' 'licensing Decision' 'tattoo Parlour Licensing' 'fit and Proper Person' 'public Interest']

['administrative Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['application to Adduce New Evidence' 'licensing Decision' 'tattoo Parlour Licensing' 'fit and Proper Person' 'public Interest']

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

Procedural Posture

Internal Appeal / Application to Adduce Fresh Evidence on Appeal

Legal Issues

1 ['Should fresh evidence be admitted on appeal?' "Was the appellant's membership in the Rebels Motorcycle Club a significant factor?" 'Would the new evidence likely produce a different result?']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

application for admission of fresh evidence refused

Orders

['The application that fresh evidence be admitted at the hearing of this appeal be refused.']