Butler v Commissioner for Fair Trading [2017] NSWCATAD 138
The Tribunal found that Mr Butler's knowing breach of licensing requirements—tattooing without a licence after being notified of refusal—rendered him not fit and proper to be licensed at present and that granting a licence would be contrary to the public interest by undermining public confidence in the regulatory scheme.
- Parties
- Applicant: Joshua Butler; First Respondent: Commissioner for Fair Trading; Second Respondent: Commissioner of Police
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 01 May 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Licence Review / Final Determination
- Outcome
- Licence refusal affirmed
- Legal Topics
- Fit and Proper Person, Public Interest, Tattoo Parlours Licensing, Regulatory Compliance, Criminal History in Licensing Decisions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Joshua Butler
Applicant
Commissioner for Fair Trading
First Respondent
Commissioner of Police
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Licence Review / Final Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether it is contrary to the public interest to grant Mr Butler a tattooist licence
- 2 Whether Mr Butler is a fit and proper person to hold a tattooist licence
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that Mr Butler's knowing breach of licensing requirements—tattooing without a licence after being notified of refusal—rendered him not fit and proper to be licensed at present and that granting a licence would be contrary to the public interest by undermining public confidence in the regulatory scheme.
Court Disposition
Licence refusal affirmed
Orders
- The decision of the Chief Executive to refuse Mr Butler a tattooist licence is affirmed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment