Under the public interest test in s 38(2) of the Liquor Control Act 1988 (WA), the Liquor Commission is obliged to evaluate all evidence before it and draw inferences (including from notorious facts and evidence of business model success in other localities with comparable demographics), rather than requiring direct survey evidence of consumer demand in the specific locality. The Commission's discretion under s 33(1), though described as 'absolute', is confined by the objects of the Act in s 5 and does not permit refusal of an application where all negative aspects have been rejected and positive aspects accepted, unless the Commission properly evaluates the evidence and applies the statutory criteria. A focus on whether a 'general principle' about business model popularity justifies a licence, rather than evaluating the actual evidence in context, constitutes asking the wrong question and is jurisdictional error.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 14 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 14 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.