Wong v Australian Community Pharmacy Authority [2011] FCA 52

Wong v Australian Community Pharmacy Authority [2011] FCA 52

Persons whose economic interests may be affected by the approval of a competing pharmacy under s 90 of the National Health Act 1953 (Cth) have no statutory or common law entitlement to procedural fairness from the Authority, where the statutory scheme does not so provide. The Authority only needs to be satisfied of the objective criteria set by the Pharmacy Rules, and the evidence shows the Authority considered the material provided by the applicant. No failure to have regard to a relevant consideration or unreasonableness is made out.

Parties
Applicant: Shui Su Wong; First Respondent: Australian Community Pharmacy Authority; Second Respondent: Secretary of the Department of Health and Ageing; Third Respondent: Robert Pearson
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Relevant Consideration, Unreasonableness, Standing Under ADJR Act
Administrative Law Procedural Fairness Relevant Consideration Unreasonableness Standing Under ADJR Act

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shui Su Wong

Applicant

Australian Community Pharmacy Authority

First Respondent

Secretary of the Department of Health and Ageing

Second Respondent

Robert Pearson

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was entitled to procedural fairness in the approval process for establishing a competing pharmacy under National Health Act 1953 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the Authority failed to take into account a relevant consideration in determining the catchment area and its population under Pharmacy Rules
  3. 3 Whether the Authority’s decision to recommend approval was unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Persons whose economic interests may be affected by the approval of a competing pharmacy under s 90 of the National Health Act 1953 (Cth) have no statutory or common law entitlement to procedural fairness from the Authority, where the statutory scheme does not so provide. The Authority only needs to be satisfied of the objective criteria set by the Pharmacy Rules, and the evidence shows the Authority considered the material provided by the applicant. No failure to have regard to a relevant consideration or unreasonableness is made out.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The applicant's application dated 20 May 2010 is dismissed.
  • The applicant is to pay the respondents' costs.