AXIOM
… A Policeman (sorry Woman), stops you for alleged speeding….The Policeman had powers to stop, arrest if neccesary and provide a Plaint to the Court….
No powers of arrest under the Traffic Act for speeding, although there are such powers for other offences. The Criminal Code (Queensland at least) provides for powers of arrest for Dangerous Driving the proof of which may consist of a number of offences, including speeding.
Commit enough speeding offences and you will be asked to show cause why your licence should not be suspended or cancelled. Such suspension or cancellation is effected by a police officer, not a court, exercising similar rights as contained under CAR 269.
The lawmakers (Parliament) confer those powers upon the regulators.
… Blue Hauler, a question, where does it say that a licence is a privelege and not a right ?
Section 9 of the Civil Aviation Act confers powers upon CASA to issue licences, certificates etc.
Where does it say that a person has a right to hold a licence? It doesn’t. Therefore a licence is a privilege conferred by CASA
As stated in my post above CASA has the power under CAR 269 to vary, suspend or cancel such licence, certificate or authority. Sub-paragraph (3) of that regulation requires “…CASA to give notice in writing to the holder…the facts and circumstances that in the opinion of CASA, warrant consideration being given to …cancellation of the licence, and allow the holder…to show cause, within such time as CASA specifies in that notice…”
CAR 272A states that if “…CASA suspends a licence…its holder is taken not to be the holder of the licence…during the period of the suspension.” The lawmakers have conferred a right upon CASA to withdraw
privileges previously granted.
An aggrieved party does have a
right of appeal by virtue of Section 31 of the Civil Aviation Act by making “…application to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for review of a reviewable decision”
My hypothetical: An authority issues a person with a licence to carry a hand gun subject to certain conditions. That person abuses those conditions. Shouldn’t that authority have the power to rescind its original decision based on such evidence it has at its disposal? Would the general public feel safe if the licence was not rescinded? Supposing the condition was a non-reversible mental illness (loss of fitness) could they not cancel the licence for life? In any event the aggrieved person is always at liberty to appeal the decision of the authority through the courts. All sounds constitutional to me!