REB v Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2020] QCAT 312

Date: 5 August 2020
Tribunal: Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Tribunal Member: Member Hughes
Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) Sections: Ss 13, 26
Rights considered: Right to protection of families and children
Other Legislation: Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 66; Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld) ss 6, 156, 167, 221, 226, 360, Sch 1
Keywords: Children and Families; Education, Training and Employment

This case concerned an application for review of the respondent’s decision to issue a negative blue card notice to the applicant, REB, due to a previous conviction for contravening a Protection Order naming his former partner and her children. The Tribunal held that the best interests of children took priority over the applicant’s interests, citing sections 13 and 26 of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld). The Tribunal confirmed the respondent’s decision to issue a negative blue card notice on the basis that it would not be in the best interests of children to award a positive notice.

This case concerned an application for review of the respondent’s decision to issue a negative blue card notice to the applicant, REB. In 2014, REB was convicted of contravening a Protection Order by committing acts of domestic violence against his former partner and her children. The Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld), provides a blue card negative notice may be issued if a person is convicted of a ‘serious offence’ or in other exceptional cases where it is not in the best interests of children for a positive notice to be issued. REB was refused a blue card on the grounds that this was an exceptional case.

The Tribunal noted that the ‘law requires that in considering whether to issue a person a positive notice for a “Blue Card”, the interests of children must take priority over an applicant’s interests’: at [33]. The Tribunal held that this was ‘consistent with human rights considerations’ and cited section 13 (human rights may be limited) and 26 of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) (the right to protection of families and children): at [33].

The Tribunal confirmed the decision of the respondent to issue REB with a negative notice, on the basis that the Tribunal was not ‘satisfied that REB has addressed the specific risk factors or triggers for that offending behaviour’: at [36].

Visit the reported judegement: https://www.queenslandjudgments.com.au/case-download/id/345240