Samad v District Court of New South Wales [2002] HCA 24

Samad v District Court of New South Wales [2002] HCA 24

Clause 149 of the Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Regulation 1994 (NSW) conferred a discretion on the Director-General to suspend or cancel a licence; the District Court erred in law by treating the power as mandatory. The discretion required consideration not only of disruption to amenity but also of ameliorative actions, user needs, and alternative arrangements. The orders of the District Court and Court of Appeal are vitiated by jurisdictional error and must be quashed.

Parties
Appellants: Abdus Samad & Ors; First Respondent: District Court of New South Wales; Second Respondent: Director-General, Department of Health (NSW)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment by High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Statutory Discretion, Licence Suspension and Cancellation, Administrative Review, Certiorari
Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Licensing Law Statutory Discretion Licence Suspension and Cancellation Administrative Review Certiorari

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 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdus Samad & Ors

Appellants

District Court of New South Wales

First Respondent

Director-General, Department of Health (NSW)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment by High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether cl 149 of the Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Regulation 1994 (NSW) conferred a discretion on the Director-General to suspend or cancel a licence, or imposed a duty to do so if specified grounds are met
  2. 2 Whether the District Court erred in law by misinterpreting the scope of discretion under cl 149
  3. 3 Whether the orders of the District Court and Court of Appeal should be quashed due to jurisdictional error

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 149 of the Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Regulation 1994 (NSW) conferred a discretion on the Director-General to suspend or cancel a licence; the District Court erred in law by treating the power as mandatory. The discretion required consideration not only of disruption to amenity but also of ameliorative actions, user needs, and alternative arrangements. The orders of the District Court and Court of Appeal are vitiated by jurisdictional error and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Set aside order of the Court of Appeal of New South Wales dated 28 November 2000
  • Order in the nature of certiorari quashing orders 1, 2 and 3 made by the District Court of New South Wales on 14 April 2000