NTT v Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2023] QCAT 120

Date: 29 March 2023
Tribunal: Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Tribunal Member: Member Cooper
Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) Sections: s 8, s 13, s 25, s 26(2), s36(2), s 48, s 58
Rights Considered: Right to privacy and reputation; Right to protection of families and children; Right to education
Other Legislation: Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld), s 5, s 6, s 15, s 16, s 221, s 226, s 228, s 353, s 354, s 360, Schedule 7; Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 17, s 18(1), s 19, s 20, s 21, s 24, s 28, s 66; Commission for Children and Young People Bill 2000 Explanatory Notes; Child Protection Act 2009 (Qld), s 187; Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000 (Qld), s 7
Keywords: Blue Card

This case concerned an application for review of the respondent’s decision to issue a negative blue card notice to the applicant. The Tribunal did not consider the applicant’s submissions that contended the grant of an earlier Notice to Produce was a breach of the rights to privacy and reputation (section 25), right to protection of families and children (section 26), and right to a fair hearing (section 31) pursuant to the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld). The Tribunal otherwise said it considered the applicant’s human rights submissions but that any limitation was justified, without providing reasoning.

The decision notes that the applicant contended there were breaches of ss 25, 26 and 31 of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) arising from the decision to grant a Notice to Produce and in respect of information provided in response by Child Safety. However, the Tribunal did not address the submissions on the basis that any opposition should have been by way of review at the time of the decision to grant the Notice to Produce. The applicant was not able to prevent the Tribunal from considering the information that had been produced.

In respect of the decision to affirm the respondent’s decision, the Tribunal did not give detailed consideration to any engaged human rights. The Tribunal noted that it considered the applicant’s submissions on human rights, but was satisfied that any limitation on the applicant’s human rights is justified because it has the proper purpose of promoting and protecting the rights, interests and wellbeing of children and young people.

Visit the judgement: NTT v Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2023] QCAT 120