Alphabetical listing of cases

The case concerned a negative blue card notice to an applicant convicted of assault offences arising from an altercation in March 2019. The Tribunal was satisfied that the applicant’s case was an exceptional case. The Tribunal acknowledged that the human rights of the applicant to ‘privacy and reputation’, to ‘take part in public life’ and ‘to further vocational education and training’ would be affected by the decision.

​​​​​​​This case concerned an application for review of the respondent’s decision to issue a negative blue card notice to the applicant, CA, due to his lengthy criminal history. In conducting its review, Member Fitzpatrick had regard to the applicant’s right to a fair hearing (section 31) and right not to be tried or punished more than once (section 34), as well as the right to protection of families and children (section 26(2)) under the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld).

This matter concerned an appeal of the respondent’s decision to suspend the appellant from her duty without remuneration, following the appellant’s failure to comply with vaccination requirements.

The applicant sought a review of a decision to issue her a negative notice in response to an application for a blue card. The Tribunal found that the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) did not apply, as the proceedings began before the commencement of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld). 

This case concerned an appeal of a disciplinary findings decision and suspension without pay decision due to non-compliance with the COVID-19 vaccination requirement policy.

This matter concerned an appeal of the respondent’s decision to refuse to convert the appellant’s employment from an AO5 Deployment Officer to an AO6 Senior Deployment Officer where she had been effectively acting at the higher level since August 2018.

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by the Queensland Police Service to revoke the applicant’s weapons license. The Tribunal upheld the decision on the grounds that the applicant was no longer a fit and proper person to hold such a license.

On appeal to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission, the appellant sought a review of a decision by the Queensland Police Service to suspend her employment without remuneration after she refused to comply with Direction No. 12 that mandated the COVID-19 vaccination for the health and safety of members of the Queensland Police Service.

This matter concerned an appeal brought by an employee of Queensland Health against a decision made by the respondent pursuant to the Health Employment Directive No 12/21 – Employee COVID-19 vaccination requirements (‘the Directive’).

This case involved an application for review of a decision made by the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages to register the parent who gave birth to his child as the child’s ‘mother’, in circumstances where that parent identifies as male. The Tribunal briefly considered the right to recognition and equality before the law, the right to privacy and reputation and the right to protection of families and children (sections 15, 25 and 16 of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld)) but ultimately decided that as the proceedings commenced before the commencement of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld), it was not applicable.