Firearms Licence Appeal SA: Refusals, Cancellations and SACAT Review
Firearms licence appeals in South Australia
A refusal letter, a suspension while an investigation runs, or a cancellation that takes the whole collection with it: the Registrar of Firearms can do all three, and the notice rarely explains what to do next. A 28 day clock governs any firearms licence appeal SA licence holders bring, and it does not start on the day you decide to fight it. We act for licence holders, farmers, collectors, sport shooters and dealers across South Australia. Every hour matters: book a same-day free 30-minute consultation or call (08) 7094 2021 now.
Firearms licence decisions: key facts
| Issue | Position in South Australia |
|---|---|
| The decisions | Refusal of a licence (section 15); variation, suspension including pending investigation, or cancellation (section 20); refusal of a permit to acquire (section 23). Firearms Act 2015 (SA). |
| The gateway test | Fit and proper person, section 7: three automatic disqualifiers, a discretionary list, and express regard to reputation, associates and the risk of misuse. |
| What the test means in the cases | No fixed meaning; it takes its content from its context and the activities involved, and in South Australia requires both knowledge of the obligations and the integrity to be trusted with them. The Registrar must be reasonably satisfied of the facts and must give substantial weight to public safety, and a record does not disqualify of itself. |
| The automatic consequences | A licence must not be granted within 5 years of a finding of guilt for a prescribed offence (section 15(5)), and an existing licence must be cancelled (section 20(7)). No new application for 3 years after the Registrar cancels under section 20(6) or (7), subject to any exception in the regulations (section 14(4)). |
| Personal protection | Never a genuine reason (section 15(3)(a)). Protection of property is excluded only where the licence would not authorise it (section 15(3)(b)). A primary production licence can cover a category H handgun only on a property of at least 15,000 hectares, or one specified in a licence under the 1977 Act (Firearms Regulations 2017, regulation 18(3)(c)). |
| Review route | A firearms licence appeal goes to SACAT under section 47, which lists the reviewable decisions: licence, permit and registration refusals, conditions, variations, suspensions and cancellations, among others. The Registrar's internal review under section 46 belongs to the interim prohibition order chain, not to licence decisions. |
| Time limits | Lodge a firearms licence appeal with SACAT within 28 days of the decision, or within 28 days after receiving written reasons you asked for within 28 days of the decision. The Tribunal can extend time (section 47(2), (5) and (6)). |
| Reasons | Given on request (section 47(2)). Where the decision rests on criminal intelligence, the only reason required is that it was made on public interest grounds (sections 15(7), 20(12) and 47(3)). |
| Surrender | A cancellation, suspension or refused renewal requires surrender of all firearms, parts, sound moderators and ammunition, immediately if the notice was served personally or within 7 days if posted (section 21), whether or not you seek review. |
| First step | Same-day free 30-minute consultation. Call (08) 7094 2021. |
What can the Registrar do to your firearms licence?
Four things. The Registrar of Firearms can refuse an application, vary a licence, suspend it including while an investigation runs, or cancel it. Written notice with reasons is generally required, and the Registrar may limit a licence rather than cancel it outright. Each decision sits within a review pathway, and a firearms licence appeal SA holders bring starts from the notice in hand.
The scheme is set out in the Firearms Act 2015 (SA) (the Act), with review in sections 46 to 48. Under section 12, a licence authorises possession for a purpose authorised under it, the regulations set the licence categories and purposes, and the purpose on your licence is the yardstick the Registrar measures you against later. The law here is stated as at October 2026 and is current to the Act as in force 19 February 2026 and the Firearms Regulations 2017 (SA) as in force 8 July 2021.
| Registrar decision | What it does | Provision |
|---|---|---|
| Refusal of a licence | Rejects the application on statutory grounds | section 15 |
| Variation | Changes the firearms covered, the conditions or the purposes | section 20 |
| Suspension | Puts the licence out of effect, including pending an investigation | section 20 |
| Cancellation | Ends the licence, and is mandatory for certain offences | section 20 |
| Refusal of a permit to acquire | Blocks acquisition of a particular firearm | section 23 |
Section 20 does most of the work once you hold a licence. The grounds include improperly obtaining the licence, not using it for the authorised purpose, non-compliance with the Act or a condition, and the grounds that would justify refusal. Two features catch people out. Suspension can be imposed pending an investigation (section 20(8)), so a licence can be inactive long before any court reaches a view. And a notice varying or cancelling a licence must set out the Registrar’s reasons, unless the variation or cancellation was made on your own application (section 20(10) and (11)), so a notice that tells you nothing is worth examining. Under the 1977 Act, the District Court held that a decision to cancel requires the Registrar to be reasonably satisfied of the material facts, and that suspicion or speculation is not enough: Coff v Registrar of Firearms [2016] SADC 140 at [50].
Free Consultation. If a notice has arrived, the date on it has already started something. Book a same-day free 30-minute consultation or call (08) 7094 2021.
On this page
- What fit and proper means
- What the courts say about the test
- Why a licence is refused
- The automatic bars
- How similar matters tend to play out
- How the appeal works
- A well prepared review
- How a charge, an order or a storage breach reaches your licence
- How we run a licence review
- Case law in South Australia
- Frequently asked questions
What does fit and proper person mean for a firearms licence?
It is the gateway test for the whole scheme. Section 7 of the Act sets out matters that make a person automatically not fit and proper, a longer list that may be treated that way, and an express permission to look at reputation, associates and risk. Most people assume it is a criminal record check. It is wider.
The automatic disqualifiers
Under section 7(1) and (2), a person is not a fit and proper person for a purpose under the Act if any of these applies:
- They are prohibited from possessing or using a firearm by an order of a court.
- A firearms prohibition order applies to them.
- They have a physical or mental illness, condition or disorder, or there are other circumstances, that would make it unsafe for them to possess a firearm or ammunition.
There is no weighing exercise here. If one applies, the gateway is shut until the underlying position changes, which is why a prohibition order and a licence problem are usually the same problem. See our guide to firearms prohibition orders.
The discretionary grounds
Section 7(3) then lists matters on which a person may be taken not to be fit and proper:
- Not complying with the requirements for the safe handling, use, storage or transport of firearms.
- Findings of guilt for offences under the Act, the 1977 Act or interstate firearms laws, or for offences involving actual or threatened violence.
- Findings of guilt for offences prescribed by the regulations.
- Findings of guilt for fraud or deception to obtain a licence or permit.
- Being, or having been, subject to an intervention order or a foreign restraining order.
- Failing to comply with a requirement to undergo a medical examination or provide a medical report under section 53.
These are permissive, so each calls for an answer rather than an admission. An old conviction, a storage breach found on inspection, or an intervention order made without any finding about firearms can be met with evidence. Storage is the ground holders underestimate most, covered in our guide to firearm storage offences.
Reputation, associates and the risk of misuse
This is the part lawful owners never see coming.
Section 7(4)(a) permits regard to be had to the reputation, honesty and integrity of the person, their close associates and the people they associate with. Section 7(4)(b) requires regard to be had to the risks that the person will use a firearm for an unlawful purpose, to harm themselves or to harm another, or will fail to keep continuous and responsible control of a firearm. In that connection it allows regard to past behaviour, instability, intemperate habits, way of living and domestic circumstances.
Three things follow. The assessment is not confined to what you have been charged with, so material that never produced a charge can still be weighed. Your associates are relevant by the express words of the section. Under the predecessor provision the District Court read association purposively: the Registrar did not need proof of specific associations on specific occasions, and association was inferred from the structure of a motorcycle club whose rules required attendance at meetings (Pepper v Registrar of Firearms [2016] SADC 38 at [32] to [34]). And health information can be decisive.
That is why a review saying only “I have no convictions” so often fails. It answers a narrower question than section 7 asks.
What do the courts say about the fit and proper test?
The phrase has no fixed meaning. In Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond [1990] HCA 33, (1990) 170 CLR 321, Toohey and Gaudron JJ said that “fit and proper person”, standing alone, carries no precise meaning and takes its meaning from its context, from the activities in which the person is or will be engaged and the ends those activities serve. Depending on the activities, the question may be whether improper conduct has occurred, whether it is likely to occur, whether it can be assumed it will not occur, or whether the community will have confidence that it will not. Character or reputation may be enough to ground a finding that a person is not fit and proper (at [36] of their Honours’ reasons). They added that the question is one of value judgment, in which the seriousness of particular conduct, and the weight of matters in the person’s favour, are for the decision maker (at [63]). The older formulation is that fitness for an office involves honesty, knowledge and ability: Hughes and Vale Pty Ltd v New South Wales (No 2) [1955] HCA 28, (1955) 93 CLR 127, per Dixon CJ, McTiernan and Webb JJ.
In South Australia the test requires the applicant to show two things: a requisite knowledge of the duties and responsibilities of the licence, and sufficient moral integrity and rectitude to be safely accredited to the public with the work the licence entails. That is Walters J’s formulation in Sobey v Commercial and Private Agents Board (1979) 22 SASR 70 at 76, as quoted and applied to firearms in Coff at [46]. In the same case Walters J treated a record of previous offences as central to the question, while accepting that after a considerable lapse of time, weight might properly be given to later good behaviour (at 75, quoted in Coff at [52]). On that approach fitness varies with the licence. A sporting shooter with no adverse history, a club membership and a genuine reason may satisfy it readily; a dealer’s licence asks for more, because dealers are the lawful conduit for firearms to the public.
The firearms cases, all decided under the 1977 Act, add these points. The overriding policy of the legislation is to protect the public from the unsafe or criminal use of firearms: Pollitt v Police [2007] SASC 382 at [20]. The fitness provisions enliven a discretion only, so a record does not automatically disqualify, but the Registrar must place substantial weight on the overriding consideration of public safety: Coff at [54]. Grading one offence among several so as to soften its effect is the wrong approach, the antithesis of the purpose and scheme of the Act: Coff at [62]. The relevance of past offending may fade over time, but in Police v Losapio [2007] SASC 112 seven months was not long enough and the decision that the licence holder was not fit and proper was restored ([25], [26]). Drug offences, though not listed in the fitness provision, could be considered under its general limb ([22]). In a general licensing case Perry J said that a person who keeps out of trouble may in time prove fit. A record should not be held against a person indefinitely: Pav v Commercial & Private Agents Board (1988) 143 LSJS 1 at 13, as quoted in Losapio at [16]. A history of offending can itself justify refusal: Johnson v Registrar of Firearms [2001] SASC 51 at [43] and [52]. Countervailing considerations under the wider rubric of reputation, honesty and integrity may outweigh the adverse ones, and where that consideration was not completed the question of fitness was remitted to the Registrar: Zammit v Registrar of Firearms [2010] SADC 100 at [33], [51] and [52]. In Sharp Shooters Pty Ltd v Registrar of Firearms [2018] SADC 105 the District Court dismissed appeals against cancellation ([144], [170], [171]). It said, though, that because five years had passed and the licence holder had a genuine need for firearms for farming, hunting and protection from snakes, a fresh application ought to be favourably considered ([146] to [148]).
A spent conviction does not take a record out of the Registrar’s view. The rule that spent convictions are to be disregarded, in Part 3 Division 1 of the Spent Convictions Act 2009 (SA) (section 10), does not apply to the performance of a function or the exercise of a power by a justice agency (Schedule 1, clause 1). The Registrar of Firearms is a justice agency (Spent Convictions Regulations 2026 (SA), regulation 6(a)). Take advice before an application rather than assume a spent conviction is invisible.
Key points
- Fit and proper is a value judgment about knowledge and integrity, decided on the facts of the case, with substantial weight on public safety.
- A record does not disqualify of itself and its relevance may fade with time, which is why the review is built from what you have done since, not from what you have been charged with.
- Reputation, associates and risk are in the test by the express words of section 7, so a review that only says “no convictions” answers the wrong question.
Why is a firearms licence refused in SA?
Section 15 of the Act sets the grounds. The Registrar may refuse only if not satisfied of one of the matters in section 15(1). They include that the applicant is a fit and proper person, has a genuine reason to possess a firearm, could use it for the authorised purpose, has complied with the Act and licence conditions in the past and will comply in future, has established identity, residency and training, and that granting the licence would be in the public interest. An application not granted within 6 months is taken to have been refused (section 15(9)).
The genuine reason requirement
A genuine reason means a genuine intention to possess or use the firearm for a purpose that the licence would authorise (section 15(2)). The licence categories are set by regulation 13 of the Firearms Regulations 2017 (SA), among them shooting club, target shooting, hunting, paint-ball, primary production, contract shooter, collector and dealer licences.
So the question is never whether you want a firearm. It is whether your stated reason matches a purpose the Act authorises, and whether evidence supports it. That evidence is usually mundane and usually decisive: club attendance records, written landholder permission, primary production paperwork, a collection with provenance. The reason also has to match the firearm and the category. Under the 1977 regulations, a class H handgun licence could not be issued for primary production: Registrar of Firearms v Gitsham [2002] SASC 301 at [62]. The current regulations differ. A primary production licence may cover category A, B, C or H firearms, but a handgun may be used under it only on a property of at least 15,000 hectares, or on one specified in a licence under the 1977 Act that authorised handgun use there (regulation 18(2) and (3)(c)).
Why personal protection is not a reason
Section 15(3) says a person does not have a genuine reason if they intend to possess or use the firearm for personal protection or the protection of another person. Protection of property is excluded too, unless the licence would authorise that purpose. It does not matter how real the threat is or how many times police have been called.
There is a second edge. A stated intention to use a firearm against a person feeds back into the section 7 assessment, which requires regard to the risk of the person using a firearm to harm another. If protection is the honest reason, advice comes before any application.
Refusal of a permit to acquire
Under section 23 of the Act, a permit to acquire cannot be granted until 28 days after the application unless you already own a registered firearm of the same category, or the Registrar is satisfied that it is safe to grant it sooner and that there are special reasons (section 23(9) and (10)). Section 23(3) has its own refusal grounds. They include no licence authorising the firearm, not being a fit and proper person, and no genuine reason or need that an existing firearm cannot meet, although the need limb does not apply to category A firearms. They also include a particularly dangerous, easily converted or readily concealed firearm, a past failure to produce a firearm for registration, and a finding of guilt for an offence under the Act.
Note what that 28 day period is. It is a waiting time before a permit can issue, not a review deadline. The two get confused constantly.
Can you be refused a firearms licence automatically?
Yes, in two situations, and neither involves any weighing of your history. Section 15(5) requires refusal where the applicant was found guilty of a prescribed offence within the preceding five years. Section 14(4) bars a fresh application for three years after the Registrar cancels a licence under section 20(6) or (7).
The five year bar after a prescribed offence
Section 15(5) is mandatory. Where the applicant has been found guilty of a prescribed offence within the preceding five years, refusal follows. A long shooting history, a clean storage record and strong references do not answer it. There is nothing for them to be weighed against.
The trigger is a finding of guilt. That is the language the section uses, and it is not the same expression as a recorded conviction, so do not assume a sentencing outcome without a conviction takes you outside the subsection. Raise it before a plea, not afterwards. Our guide to avoiding a conviction being recorded explains the sentencing side of that decision.
The same finding of guilt also requires the Registrar to cancel a licence you already hold (section 20(7)). The section measures back five years from the application and looks for a finding of guilt inside that period. When the period will no longer catch you is often the most useful date in the matter. Whether a particular offence is prescribed, and how the period is counted on your facts, are both questions to check against the Act and the regulations.
The three year bar after a cancellation
Section 14 of the Act governs applications, including the rule that a natural person under 18 cannot apply, subject to the Act and any exception in the regulations (section 14(3)). The regulations allow, for example, a person aged 15 or over to hold a primary production licence as an employee or relative of the operator, limited to category A or B firearms while under 18 (regulation 18(4)). Section 14(4) is the one to read closely: after the Registrar cancels a licence under section 20(6) or (7), no fresh application can be made for three years, subject to any exception in the regulations.
Read the exception carefully. A cancellation made on the holder’s own application, under section 20(13), sits outside the bar. A cancellation imposed on you does not. The two paths look similar on the day and are three years apart afterwards, which is why a cancellation is worth challenging even with no immediate plan to shoot again.
A cancellation also triggers the surrender obligations in section 21 of the Act, whether or not you seek review: immediately if the notice was served on you personally, or within 7 days if it was sent by registered post. Deal with the surrender first, then challenge.
Book a same-day free 30-minute consultation. Before you sign anything, surrender anything or let a deadline pass, get the position checked. Call (08) 7094 2021.
How similar matters tend to play out
Three illustrations of how sections 7, 15 and 20 and the cases combine on ordinary facts. They are not predictions. Outcome depends on the decision type, the material, the deadline and the Tribunal.
The refusal on genuine reason. A first applicant for a category A and B licence gives “protecting my family” as the reason. Refusal follows under section 15(3)(a), and the stated intention bears on the risks section 7(4)(b) requires the Registrar to consider. A fresh application with a club membership, attendance records or a landholder’s written permission answers the genuine reason ground; the earlier statement is met with evidence about what the firearms are actually for.
The cancellation after a storage inspection and a drug matter. A long term licence holder is found with ammunition in the same safe as the rifles during an inspection and has a simple possession drug matter from the same year. The Registrar cancels under section 20. The review is close to the Coff fact pattern. A firearms lapse combined with drug offences was the combination that saw the cancellation upheld there, the Registrar must give substantial weight to public safety, and an argument that grades the drug matter as minor beside the storage lapse is the wrong approach. What carries weight is the fix, the receipts, the time since, and the licensing history, put to SACAT within the window, with the three year bar in section 14(4) as the reason to run it even if the holder does not plan to shoot soon.
The suspension pending investigation. A holder is charged with possessing a firearm outside the licence category after a private sale went wrong, and the Registrar suspends the licence under section 20 while the charge runs. The criminal matter and the licence run on different clocks. The licence review is lodged inside its window with the permit paperwork and the licensing history, and the charge is answered on its own terms. Section 9 is a prescribed offence, so a finding of guilt, with or without a conviction, requires the Registrar to cancel the licence and bars a new one for five years (sections 20(7) and 15(5)). The outcome of the charge decides the licence.
How does a firearms licence appeal in SA actually work?
A firearms licence appeal goes to SACAT. Section 47(1) of the Act lists the Registrar’s decisions that a person aggrieved may have reviewed by the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal:
- Refusing a licence, including a renewal, or a permit or registration.
- Imposing a licence or permit condition, or varying a licence or permit.
- Suspending or cancelling a licence, permit or registration, or refusing to revoke a suspension.
- Issuing a firearms prohibition order.
- Decisions about a company’s nominees, and decisions declared reviewable by regulation.
The Registrar’s internal review under section 46 belongs to the interim prohibition order chain, not to licence decisions.
Where a licence decision goes
Section 47 of the Act provides for review by the Tribunal under section 34 of the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (SA). That is the route for a refusal, a suspension, a cancellation, a condition you cannot live with, and for permit and registration decisions.
SACAT rehears the decision and must reach the correct or preferable decision, giving appropriate weight to the Registrar’s decision, and it can admit evidence that was not before the Registrar (South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, section 34(3) to (5)). That is why a well prepared review beats a strongly worded one. Under the predecessor Act the route ran through a review committee and then to the District Court. The Full Court held that the right of appeal from the Registrar’s decision was conditioned on the committee having first affirmed it: Registrar of Firearms v Marksman Training Systems Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] SASCFC 72 at [306], applied in Coff at [62]. The District Court could also remit a matter to the Registrar: Zammit at [51] and [52]. Those decisions are the history of the route and of the test; the current route is section 47.
Where the Registrar’s internal review fits
Section 46 of the Act provides for internal review by the Registrar, and it sits in the interim firearms prohibition order chain. A person to whom an interim order applies may apply to the Registrar for review of the decision to issue it. The section sets no time limit, the application does not affect the order’s operation, and the Registrar may affirm the decision or revoke the order.
The two pathways are easy to confuse and the confusion is expensive. If your matter is an interim prohibition order, that internal review is the first step, and our guide to firearms prohibition orders sets out the chain. If your matter is a licence, a permit or a registration decision, the material you build is for the Tribunal.
How long do you have to apply?
28 days, and the clock starts with the decision. An application to SACAT under section 47 must be made within 28 days of the decision. If the Registrar did not give written reasons at the time, you can request them within 28 days of the decision, and the application is then due within 28 days after you receive them. The Tribunal can extend time, even after it has run out (section 47(2), (5) and (6)), but an extension is a discretion, not a right, so treat the 28 days as fixed.
The window runs from the decision, not from the day you found a lawyer. Diarise it the day the notice arrives. An interim prohibition order issued by police under section 43 is different again: it is reviewed by the Registrar under section 46, which sets no time limit.
When the Registrar does not have to give reasons
The Act carries a carve-out that changes the character of some of these matters. Where a decision was made because of information the Registrar has classified as criminal intelligence, the only reason the Registrar must give is that it was made on public interest grounds (sections 15(7), 20(12) and 47(3)). The same principle appears in section 44 for prohibition orders and in section 48 for the Tribunal’s own reasons, and the Tribunal must take steps to keep the information confidential (section 48(1)).
The effect is blunt. You can be told a decision was made in the public interest and nothing more: not what is alleged, not who said it, not when.
That changes what a review can be. There is no allegation to contradict, so the work shifts to building a positive picture, and procedure carries more weight than usual.
Seeking review does not stop the decision operating. Once review proceedings have started, the Tribunal or the Registrar can stay the decision if satisfied that it is just and reasonable in the circumstances (South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, section 36). Until you hold something in writing, treat every obligation in the notice as operative.
What does a well prepared licence review look like?
A strong firearms licence appeal is evidence, filed on time, addressed to the statutory test. A review is decided on the material in front of the decision maker, so the work is assembling documents that answer the ground relied on, in the language of sections 7 and 15 and the cases on them, and lodging within the window that applies.
The material that carries weight
- The decision and the notice. Dates, the ground relied on, the provision used, and what the notice does not say.
- Licensing history. How long you have held a licence, which categories, renewals, inspections and prior dealings.
- Storage evidence. What you store firearms in, to what specification, how ammunition is separated, and any inspection results.
- Purpose evidence. Club attendance records, landholder permissions, primary production records, collection provenance.
- Medical material. Where health is raised, from a treating practitioner who knows the history.
- References. From people who understand the firearms context and have something to lose.
- Time. The courts accept that the relevance of past matters may fade with time. The record of what you have done since the event is the evidence of that.
What does not help
Three arguments come up repeatedly and none of them works: that you need the firearm for protection, which section 15(3) puts outside the scheme; that others hold licences with worse records, which does not answer the ground relied on against you; and storage left unaddressed until it is raised against you. A fourth, grading one offence among several as minor so as to soften its effect, was rejected in Coff at [62] as the antithesis of the scheme.
Treat the deadline as fixed. Protect it first and build the material second, because a lodged application can be supplemented and a missed window usually cannot.
How does a charge, an order or a storage breach reach your licence?
Through section 7. A prohibition order makes you not a fit and proper person automatically, and findings of guilt, storage non-compliance and intervention orders are matters the Registrar may treat as disqualifying. A single incident can end a licence without any court cancelling it.
A prohibition order also suspends any licence or permit you hold while it is in force, by force of section 45, so revoking the order is usually the only route back to a licence. On storage, regulation 64 of the Firearms Regulations 2017 (SA) provides that the code of practice for section 35 is set out in Schedule 1, and contravening a code provision is an offence under section 35(3) of the Act.
A charge is not a cancellation, but section 20 permits suspension pending investigation. Where the charge is possession of a firearm without a licence under section 9 of the Act, with the maximum scaling by category set in section 5, the criminal and licensing outcomes are tied together: section 9 is a prescribed offence, so a finding of guilt makes cancellation mandatory. See our guide to possessing a firearm without a licence, and matters of this kind usually start in the Adelaide Magistrates Court.
This page sits within the firearms offences in South Australia guide and the criminal defence practice pages.
How do we run a firearms licence review?
In every firearms licence appeal we start with the notice and the dates, because the deadline decides what is possible. On day one we identify the decision type, the provision it was made under, the trigger event and the operative window, and we confirm that window rather than assume it.
Then we build the review. Documents first, submissions second, written to the statutory test and the cases on it rather than to a sense of unfairness.
We do not promise outcomes. The Registrar and the Tribunal exercise discretion, and no two files are the same. These matters turn on the quality of the evidence and on meeting the deadline, both largely decided in the first week.
Every hour matters. If a decision about your firearms licence has been made, the review clock is already running. Call (08) 7094 2021 or book your free case review online.
Firearms licence case law in South Australia
The authorities below decide what fit and proper means, what the Registrar must be satisfied of, and how a firearms licence appeal ran under the old route. Each is linked to AustLII where AustLII holds the decision, with the paragraph or page where the point is made. The South Australian cases were decided under the 1977 Act. Its discretionary fitness grounds and its reputation and associates limb carried over in materially similar words, although the current section 7 adds grounds on which a person is not fit and proper. The review route did not carry over.
| Case | Court | Principle | Pinpoint |
|---|---|---|---|
| Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond [1990] HCA 33; (1990) 170 CLR 321 | High Court | "Fit and proper" takes its meaning from its context; character or reputation may ground a finding; a value judgment for the decision maker | [36], [63] (Toohey and Gaudron JJ) |
| Hughes and Vale Pty Ltd v New South Wales (No 2) [1955] HCA 28; (1955) 93 CLR 127 | High Court | Fitness for an office involves honesty, knowledge and ability | |
| Sobey v Commercial and Private Agents Board (1979) 22 SASR 70 | Supreme Court | Knowledge of the duties of the licence and sufficient moral integrity to be trusted with it; a record is central, but time can count | 75, 76 |
| Coff v Registrar of Firearms [2016] SADC 140 | District Court | Reasonable satisfaction, not suspicion; a discretion only, with substantial weight on public safety; grading offences to soften one is the wrong approach; cancellation upheld | [46], [50], [52], [54], [62], [67] |
| Pollitt v Police [2007] SASC 382 | Supreme Court | The overriding policy is to protect the public from the unsafe or criminal use of firearms | [20] |
| Police v Losapio [2007] SASC 112 | Supreme Court | Past offending may fade, but seven months was not enough; drug offences can be considered | [16], [22], [25], [26] |
| Johnson v Registrar of Firearms [2001] SASC 51 | Supreme Court | A history of offending justified refusal to renew | [43], [52], [53] |
| Zammit v Registrar of Firearms [2010] SADC 100 | District Court | Countervailing considerations may outweigh the adverse ones; fitness remitted to the Registrar | [33], [51], [52] |
| Sharp Shooters Pty Ltd v Registrar of Firearms [2018] SADC 105 | District Court | Appeals against cancellation dismissed; a fresh application after five years ought to be favourably considered | [144], [146] to [148], [170], [171] |
| Registrar of Firearms v Gitsham [2002] SASC 301 | Supreme Court | Under the 1977 regulations, no class H licence for primary production | [62] |
| Pepper v Registrar of Firearms [2016] SADC 38 | District Court | "Associates" read purposively; association inferred from a club requiring attendance at meetings | [32] to [34] |
| Registrar of Firearms v Marksman Training Systems Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] SASCFC 72 | Full Court | The predecessor review route: appeal conditioned on the committee affirming the Registrar's decision | [290], [306] |
| Pav v Commercial & Private Agents Board (1988) 143 LSJS 1 | Supreme Court | A person who keeps out of trouble may in time prove fit (general licensing) | 13 |
Case notes
Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond (1990) 170 CLR 321
Toohey and Gaudron JJ said at [36] of their reasons that the expression “fit and proper person”, standing alone, carries no precise meaning and takes its meaning from its context, from the activities the person is or will be engaged in and the ends those activities serve. Character or reputation, they said, may be sufficient to ground a finding that a person is not fit and proper. At [63] they said the question is one of value judgment, with the seriousness of conduct and the weight of favourable matters for the decision maker.
Hughes and Vale Pty Ltd v New South Wales (No 2) (1955) 93 CLR 127
Dixon CJ, McTiernan and Webb JJ said that the words “fit and proper person” give the widest scope for judgment, and that “fit”, with respect to an office, involves honesty, knowledge and ability.
Sobey v Commercial and Private Agents Board (1979) 22 SASR 70
Walters J held at 76 that an applicant must show not only a requisite knowledge of the duties and responsibilities of the licence but also sufficient moral integrity and rectitude of character to be safely accredited to the public, without further inquiry, as a person to be entrusted with the work the licence entails. At 75 he treated a record of previous offences as central to the question, while accepting that after a considerable lapse of time weight might be given to later good behaviour. Both passages are taken from their quotation in Coff at [46] and [52]. Reported series only; no AustLII link.
Coff v Registrar of Firearms [2016] SADC 140
Judge Slattery adopted the Sobey test at [46] and [52], and held at [50] that a decision to cancel requires the Registrar to be reasonably satisfied of the material facts, suspicion or speculation not being enough. At [54] he held that the fitness provisions enliven a discretion only and that committing offences does not automatically mean a person is not fit and proper, but that the Registrar was obliged to place substantial weight on the overriding consideration of public safety. At [62] he rejected an attempt to grade one offence among several so as to soften its effect as the antithesis of the scheme, and he dismissed the appeal where a firearms offence was combined with drug offences ([67]). Decided under the 1977 Act.
Pollitt v Police [2007] SASC 382
Gray J said at [20] that the overriding policy of the firearms legislation is to protect the public from the unsafe or criminal use of firearms. Decided under the 1977 Act.
Police v Losapio [2007] SASC 112
David J accepted at [25] that the relevance of past offending may fade over time, but held that seven months was not enough, allowed the appeal and restored the Deputy Registrar’s decision that the licence holder was not fit and proper ([24] to [26]). At [22] he held that drug offences, though not specified in the fitness provision, could be considered under its general limb, and at [16] he set out Perry J’s observation in Pav. Decided under the 1977 Act.
Johnson v Registrar of Firearms [2001] SASC 51
Gray J held that the licence holder’s history of offending provided proper grounds for, and fully justified, the refusal to renew his licence, and dismissed the appeal ([43], [52], [53]). Decided under the 1977 Act.
Zammit v Registrar of Firearms [2010] SADC 100
Judge Tilmouth held at [33] that even where cancellation might at first appear justified, countervailing considerations under the wider rubric of reputation, honesty and integrity might outweigh the adverse ones. He allowed the appeal and remitted the question of fitness to the Registrar for reconsideration ([51], [52]). Decided under the 1977 Act.
Sharp Shooters Pty Ltd v Registrar of Firearms [2018] SADC 105
Judge Beazley dismissed appeals by a licence holder and his company against the cancellation of their licences ([144], [170], [171]). He accepted at [146] that the events were five years old and that the holder had a genuine need for firearms for farming, hunting and, at the very least, protection from snakes, and said at [148] that a fresh application ought to be favourably considered. Decided under the 1977 Act.
Registrar of Firearms v Gitsham [2002] SASC 301
Mullighan J held at [62] that, under the 1977 regulations, there was no basis to grant a class H licence where the purpose of using the handgun was the business of primary production. Regulation 18 of the current regulations now allows category H firearms on a primary production licence in limited cases.
Pepper v Registrar of Firearms [2016] SADC 38
Judge Tilmouth held at [32] that “associates” must be construed purposefully, as something less demanding than proof of specific associations with specific people on specific occasions. At [33] and [34] he found association established from the nature and structure of a motorcycle club whose arrangements mandated attendance at meetings. Decided under the 1977 Act; the current provision is section 7(4)(a).
Registrar of Firearms v Marksman Training Systems Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] SASCFC 72
Stanley J, with whom Gray J agreed, held at [306] that under the predecessor Act the right of appeal to the District Court from a decision of the Registrar was conditional. The person must first have sought review by the committee, and the committee must have affirmed the decision. At [290] he described the committee’s function as a real but limited review. Peek J dissented. History of the review route.
Pav v Commercial & Private Agents Board (1988) 143 LSJS 1
In a security licensing appeal, Perry J said at 13 that a person who keeps out of trouble may in time be able to prove himself fit to obtain the licence. A record, he said, should not be held against a person indefinitely. The passage is taken from its quotation in Losapio at [16]. Reported series only; no AustLII link.
Frequently asked questions
Can I appeal a firearms licence refusal in South Australia?
Yes. A firearms licence appeal is a review under section 47 of the Firearms Act 2015 (SA) by the South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal of the Registrar’s decisions on licences, permits and registration, among others. The Tribunal rehears the decision and must reach the correct or preferable decision. The application must be made within 28 days of the decision, or within 28 days after receiving written reasons you asked for, so diarise the date immediately.
Why was my firearms licence refused in SA?
Section 15 sets the grounds: you are not a fit and proper person, you have no genuine reason to possess a firearm, you cannot use it for the authorised purpose, you have breached the Act before, identity, residency or training is not established, or refusal is in the public interest. Refusal is mandatory after a finding of guilt for a prescribed offence in the preceding five years.
What does fit and proper person mean for a firearms licence?
Section 7 of the Act defines it. You are not fit and proper if a court order prohibits you from firearms, a firearms prohibition order applies to you, or an illness, condition or other circumstance makes possession unsafe. Findings of guilt for firearms and violence offences, storage non-compliance, fraud and intervention orders may be treated the same way, reputation and associates can be considered, and the risks of misuse must be. The courts describe the test as a value judgment about knowledge and integrity, decided on the facts, with substantial weight on public safety.
Does a criminal record stop me getting a firearms licence?
Not by itself, unless it is a finding of guilt for a prescribed offence within the last five years, which makes refusal mandatory. Outside that bar, the courts have held that a record does not automatically disqualify, that the relevance of past offending may fade over time, and that countervailing considerations must be weighed. In Coff, a firearms offence combined with drug offences was enough to uphold a cancellation.
Can I get a firearms licence for personal protection in SA?
No. Section 15(3) says personal protection, or the protection of another person, is not a genuine reason, and protection of property is not one either unless the licence would authorise it. A genuine reason means a genuine intention to possess or use the firearm for a purpose the licence would authorise, such as target shooting, hunting, primary production, collecting or dealing. The reason also has to match the category: a handgun can be used under a primary production licence only on a very large property or one specified under the 1977 Act.
Does the Registrar look at spent convictions?
It can. The rule in the Spent Convictions Act 2009 (SA) that spent convictions are to be disregarded does not apply to the performance of a function by a justice agency (Schedule 1, clause 1). The Registrar of Firearms is a justice agency under regulation 6(a) of the Spent Convictions Regulations 2026 (SA). Take advice before an application rather than assume a spent conviction is invisible.
How long do I have to apply for a SACAT firearms review?
28 days. Under section 47 of the Firearms Act 2015 (SA), the application must be made within 28 days of the decision, or, if you asked for written reasons within 28 days of the decision, within 28 days after you receive them. The Tribunal can extend time, but that is a discretion, so diarise the date the day the notice arrives.
Can I reapply after my firearms licence is cancelled?
Not for three years, in most cases. Section 14(4) of the Act bars a fresh application for three years after the Registrar cancels a licence under section 20(6) or (7), subject to any exception in the regulations. A cancellation made on the licensee’s own application is outside the bar. That distinction is one reason a cancellation is worth challenging even if you have no immediate plan to hold firearms again.
Can the Registrar suspend my firearms licence before I am convicted?
Yes. Section 20 of the Act allows the Registrar to vary, suspend or cancel a licence, and a suspension can be imposed pending an investigation. Nothing has to be proved in a court first. A notice varying or cancelling a licence must give reasons, except where the variation or cancellation was made on the holder’s own application, and under the 1977 Act a cancellation was held to require the Registrar to be reasonably satisfied of the facts rather than merely suspicious.
Why was I not given reasons for the decision about my firearms licence?
Because the decision may have rested on criminal intelligence. Where it did, the only reason the Registrar must give is that the decision was made on public interest grounds (sections 15(7), 20(12) and 47(3) of the Act), and section 44(7) applies the same rule to prohibition orders. You may never be told what the underlying allegation is.
Do I have to surrender my firearms while I seek review?
Usually yes. A cancellation triggers the surrender obligations in section 21 of the Act, immediately if the notice was served personally or within 7 days if posted, and those operate whether or not you are seeking review. Once review proceedings start, the Tribunal or the Registrar can stay the decision if that is just and reasonable (South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, section 36), but until you hold something in writing, treat every obligation in the notice as live.
South Australian courts we attend for firearms matters
Courts we attend
Book a same-day free 30-minute consultation or call (08) 7094 2021.