Eggins v Queensland Police Service, Weapons Licensing Branch [2013] QCAT 165
CITATION: Eggins v Queensland Police Service, Weapons
Licensing Branch [2013] QCAT 165
PARTIES: Clyde Kenneth Eggins
(Applicant)
v
Queensland Police Service, Weapons Licensing
Branch
(Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER: GAR407-12
MATTER TYPE: General administrative review matters
HEARING DATE: 4 March 2013, On the papers
HEARD AT: Brisbane
DECISION OF: Kerrie O'Callaghan, Senior Member
REASONS
DELIVERED ON:
17 April 2013
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
ORDERS MADE: 1. The decision of the Queensland Police
Service, Weapons Licensing of 18 October
2012 to suspend the license of Clyde
Kenneth Eggins is stayed pending
determination of the review or earlier
order of the Tribunal.
CATCHWORDS: STAY APPLICATION – suspension of weapons
license – whether public interest outweighed the
adverse financial impact of the applicant – where
balance of convenience favoured applicant
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act
2009, s 22(3) and (4)
Weapons Act 1990, s 28(1)(a)(i)(B)
Harley v Department of Justice and Attorney-
General [2012] QCAT 39
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (QCAT Act).
-- 1 of 3 --
2
REASONS FOR DECISION
[1] Mr Eggins had a firearms license which he used in his employment as a
“rural onsite slaughter man”. His license was suspended in October 2012
on the basis that he had been charged with an offence against a law
involving the use or threatened use of violence1 and further that the
authorised officer was satisfied on reasonable grounds that Mr Eggins was
no longer a fit and proper person to hold a license.2
[2] Mr Eggins has filed an application to review the decision to suspend his
license and seeks a substituted decision that his license be reinstated until
the charges against him have been determined.
[3] He also filed an application to stay the decision pending the outcome of
the review. I granted that stay on 4 March 2013. The Queensland Police
Service, Weapons Licensing has asked for reasons for the decision
granting the stay. These are the reasons.
[4] Pursuant to s 22(3) of the QCAT Act the Tribunal can make an order
staying the operation of the reviewable decision pending the hearing if it
considers it desirable to do so.3
[5] In deciding whether it is desirable the Tribunal must have regard to the
interests of any person whose interests may be affected by the outcome of
the order, any submission made to the Tribunal by the decision maker for
the reviewable decision and the public interest.4
[6] The Tribunal may also consider other matters in addition to those specified
in s 22(4), including whether the balance of convenience favours the
granting of the stay.5
[7] The Queensland Police Service, Weapons Licensing Branch argued
against the granting of the stay on the basis that it was in the interests of
the public that his license remain suspended.
[8] The offence with which Mr Eggins has been charged which lead to the
suspension of the license is of a sexual nature which is alleged to have
occurred 25-30 years ago.
[9] His evidence is that in the intervening years he has not been charged with
any offences involving violence or any similar offences. The last entry on
his criminal history was in 1983 for drink driving.
[10] He supplements his pension through employment on properties
slaughtering animals for which a weapons license is required. He says he
holds no other qualifications and if his license remains suspended his
financial interests will be severely impacted.
1 Weapons Act 1990, s 28(1)(a)(i)(B).
2 Weapons Act 1990, s 28(1)(b).
3 QCAT Act, s22(4).
4 QCAT Act, s22(4).
5 Harley v Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2012] QCAT 39.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
[11] No doubt if he is convicted of the offence there will be further
consequences as far as his weapons license is concerned.
[12] Whilst I accept that public safety is a primary consideration, on the material
before me I am not satisfied that there is risk to the public in circumstances
where the alleged offence occurred some 25-30 years ago and Mr Eggins
had not committed any offences since that time.
[13] He relies on the income he earns from his use of firearms, slaughtering
animals on rural property.
[14] The balance of convenience is in favour of the stay and I ordered
accordingly.
-- 3 of 3 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QCAT/2013/165