False declaration in CHA licence application fails where no penalty existed on the application date, suspending action collapses

A CHA licence suspension based on alleged false declaration and suppression of material facts was found unsustainable because the application required disclosure only of penalties or prosecutions existing on the date of application. On that date, no penalty had yet been imposed in the later proceeding relied on by the Commissioner, so the answers in the application could not be treated as false. The suspension order was set aside and the appeal allowed, while the Commissioner was left free to proceed under the licensing regulations if otherwise permissible.

---

---

Issues: Whether the suspension of the CHA licence was justified on the ground that the appellant had made a false declaration or suppressed material facts in the application.

Analysis: The application form required disclosure of prior penalties or prosecutions as on the date of application. On that date, no penalty had yet been imposed in the later proceeding relied upon by the Commissioner. The answers given in the application could not, therefore, be treated as false on the relevant date. The foundation for suspension under the licensing regulations was thus unsustainable.

Conclusion: The suspension order was set aside and the appeal was allowed. The Commissioner was left free to proceed under the relevant provisions of the licensing regulations, if otherwise permissible.

---