Australia, July 10 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on June 11:

1. The applicant Mr Umer Farooq applied to this tribunal on 5 February 2025 for review of a decision by the respondent Commissioner on 31 January 2025 to affirm the decision to revoke his security licence under s 26(1)(d) of the Security Industry Act 1997 (SI Act) and cl 25(1) of the Security Industry Regulation 2016.

2. The issues for consideration by the tribunal are: (1) whether it is contrary to the public interest for the applicant to continue to hold a security licence, and if so, should his licence be revoked under s 26(1)(d) of the SI Act and cl 25(1) of the Regulation, and (2) does the Mutual Recognition Act 1992 (Cth.) (MRA) preclude revocation of the licence. It is not contended that the applicant is not a fit and proper person to hold a security licence.

3. On 12 January 2024 the applicant applied for a class 1A, 1C and 1E licence in the Australian Capital Territory under the Security Industry Act 2003 (ACT), giving an address which is anonymized in these reasons as "ACT address" (exhibit R1, pp 15 - 20). That licence was granted on 13 February 2024.

4. On 28 February 2024 he submitted an application for a security licence of the same classes in New South Wales, under the provisions of the MRA, using the same ACT address (id., 1 - 10). Following a 5-month postponement, that licence was granted on 2 August 2024 (id., 39 - 43).

5. The applicant on 8 August 2024 submitted a change of address form for the ACT licence (id., 37 - 38), giving as his new address an address in New South Wales which is anonymized in these reasons as "Sydney address" and the ACT address as his "Previous physical address" And "Previous postal address".

6. On 8 November 2024, the respondent's Security Licensing and Enforcement Directorate (SLED) issued to the applicant a notice to show cause in relation to the New South Wales licence on the basis of New South Wales police Computerized Operational Policing System (COPS) records indicating that the address provided for the ACT licence may have been false (id., 96 - 97, 44). The notice required the applicant to provide SLED with evidence of his residential and mailing addresses from the time of his application for the ACT licence until the date of the notice. On the same date, the applicant applied for a master's licence in the ACT, using his Sydney address (id., 29 - 32.

7. On 9 December 2024, the applicant responded to the show cause notice stating that the ACT address was a temporary address and that he had now updated his permanent address to his New South Wales address, on both his ACT and NSW licenses (id., 45 - 46).

8. His New South Wales licence was revoked by the respondent on 20 January 2025 under s 26(1)(d) of the SI Act and cl 25(1) of the Regulation. The delegate concluded that it would be contrary to the public interest for the applicant to continue to hold the New South Wales licence because he had failed to provide evidence of his ACT residential or mailing addresses, or both, history in response to the notice, and following examination of New South Wales police records it was the delegate's opinion that the applicant had provided false information to the ACT in order to be granted the New South Wales licence.

9. The applicant applied for an internal review of the revocation decision, and on 31 January 2025 a delegate of the respondent affirmed the decision. On 5 February 2025 the applicant applied to this tribunal for review of the internal review decision, and the matter came on for hearing on 29 May 2025. An Urdu interpreter was sworn but was required only for a few particular words or phrases.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/19757183c52126f1b227c5de)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.