Law School

ZB v Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2021] QCAT 82

  1. Home
  2. Research
  3. Vulnerable Persons Project
  4. Human Rights Case Law

Date: 9 March 2021
Tribunal: Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Tribunal Member: Member Deane
Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) Sections: ss 8, 13, 21, 23, 26, 27, 31, 34, 36, 48, 58, 108
Rights Considered: Right to freedom of expression, Right to take part in public life, Right to protection of families and children, Right to a fair hearing, Right not to be tried or punished more than once
Other Legislation: Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) ss 20, 24, 66; Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld), ss 5, 6, 16, 221, 226, 355, 358, 360, 536, 580, Schedule 2, Schedule 4, Schedule 5
Keywords: Education, training and employment; blue card

This case concerned an application for review of the respondent’s decision to issue a negative blue card notice to the applicant, ZB. The Tribunal found that the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) did not apply to the proceedings, as they were commenced before the legislation came into effect. However, the Tribunal noted that if the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) did apply, its decision would potentially impact ZB’s right to freedom of expression (section 21), right to take part in public life (section 23), right to a fair hearing (section 31), and right not to be tried or punished more than once (section 34), as well as the rights of children (section 26(2)). 

This case concerned an application for review of the respondent’s decision to issue a negative Blue Card notice to the applicant, ZB, after he was convicted of contravening a domestic violence order in 2014. ZB was not convicted of a ‘disqualifying offence’ within the meaning of the Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld). Consequently, a positive notice needed to be issued to ZB unless the Tribunal made a finding that this was an exceptional case where it was not in the best interests of children for a positive notice to be issued.

The Tribunal noted that the object of Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld) is ‘to promote and protect the rights, interests and wellbeing of children and young people’ and that the Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld) is to be administered ‘having regard to the principles that the welfare and best interests of a child are paramount’: at [7]-[8].

Having regard to the evidence of ZB’s risk to children and relevant mitigating factors, the Tribunal found that it was an exceptional case in which it would not be in the best interests of children to issue a positive notice. The Tribunal therefore confirmed the respondent’s decision. 

The Tribunal found that the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) did not apply to the proceedings, as they were commenced before the legislation came into effect. However, had the Act applied, the Tribunal noted it would have been acting as a public entity and therefore would have to give proper consideration to human rights. The Tribunal accepted that its decision would potentially impact ZB’s right to freedom of expression (section 21), right to take part in public life (section 23), right to a fair hearing (section 31), and right not to be tried or punished more than once (section 34). However, it ultimately was ‘satisfied that the decision is compatible with human rights as the limitations on those rights are reasonable and justifiable’: at [39]. 

Visit the reported judgement: https://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2021/QCAT21-082.pdf