Martin and Anor v Kelly and Ors [2008] NSWSC 577

Martin and Anor v Kelly and Ors [2008] NSWSC 577

The decision of the Liquor Administration Board to approve the transfer of poker machine entitlements was not affected by error of law or jurisdictional error. The plaintiffs did not have a present 'financial interest in the hotelier's licence' as required under s.19(3)(c) of the Gaming Machines Act 2001, since the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Plaintiff: George Owen Martin; Plaintiff: Alison Martin; First Defendant: Robert James Kelly; Second Defendant: Kenneth John Kelly; Third Defendant: Liquor Administration Board; Fourth Defendant: Reserve Hotels Pty Limited; Fifth Defendant: Scott Patrick Lane
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Prerogative Relief Application (judicial Review) / Final Judgment on Summons
Outcome
Plaintiffs' application dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review of Administrative Action, Prerogative Relief – Certiorari, Financial Interest in Hotelier's Licence, Transfer of Poker Machine Entitlements
Administrative Law Gaming Law Judicial Review of Administrative Action Prerogative Relief – Certiorari Financial Interest in Hotelier's Licence Transfer of Poker Machine Entitlements

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

George Owen Martin

Plaintiff

Alison Martin

Plaintiff

Robert James Kelly

First Defendant

Kenneth John Kelly

Second Defendant

Liquor Administration Board

Third Defendant

Reserve Hotels Pty Limited

Fourth Defendant

Scott Patrick Lane

Fifth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Prerogative Relief Application (judicial Review) / Final Judgment on Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs had a 'financial interest in the hotelier's licence' under s.19(3)(c) and (5) Gaming Machines Act 2001
  2. 2 Whether the Liquor Administration Board committed error of law, jurisdictional error, or manifest unreasonableness in approving the transfer of poker machine entitlements
  3. 3 Whether relief in the nature of certiorari should be granted to quash the LAB decision

Ratio Decidendi

The decision of the Liquor Administration Board to approve the transfer of poker machine entitlements was not affected by error of law or jurisdictional error. The plaintiffs did not have a present 'financial interest in the hotelier's licence' as required under s.19(3)(c) of the Gaming Machines Act 2001, since the rent being paid at the relevant time was a fixed amount not calculated by reference to turnover and the parties had not acted to enforce any equitable or turnover-based lease. The LAB's findings were open on the evidence and law, and their decision was not manifestly unreasonable.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' application dismissed

Orders

  • Summons dismissed
  • Plaintiffs to pay the costs of the First, Second, Fourth and Fifth Defendants