DM v Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2022] QCAT 199

Date: 30 May 2022
Tribunal: Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Tribunal Member: Member Stepniak
Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) Sections: ss 4, 8, 13, 21, 23, 25, 26, 31, 36, 58
Rights Considered: Right to freedom of expression; Taking part in public life; Right to privacy and reputation; Right to protection of families and children; Right to a fair hearing; Right to education.
Other Legislation: International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Articles 4, 6; Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ss 35, 39; Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) s 25; Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) ss 17, 19, 20, 21, 24, 28, 66, 90; Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld), ss 5, 6, 220, 221, 225, 226, 318, 319, 335, 337, 338, 353, 354, 360, 361, Chapter 8, Part 4, Division 9, Schedule 1, s 11, Schedule 2, Schedule 4, Schedule 7.
Keywords: Blue Card

This case concerned an application for review of the Respondent’s decision to issue a negative notice to the applicant after he failed to make submissions regarding his eligibility following concerns about his criminal record. In ordering that the Respondent’s decision be set aside, the Tribunal noted that the Applicant’s right to privacy and reputation (section 25), right to taking part in public life (section 23), right to further vocational education and training (section 36(2)), and right to a fair and public hearing (section 31) were relevant, but did not substantively discuss these rights.

The Applicant had been issued a negative blue card notice on the basis that his circumstances amounted to an exceptional case where the issuing of a positive notice would not be in the best interests of children: at [13]. The Applicant had been convicted of two counts of supplying small quantities of prohibited drugs and of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The Applicant also had a finalised charge for reckless grievous bodily harm that had been withdrawn. The Tribunal set aside the Respondent’s decision and held that the Applicant’s case was not an exceptional case where it would not be in the best interests of children to deny a blue card.

The Tribunal considered that the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) placed it under an obligation to give proper consideration to any relevant human rights in making its decision, and noted that the applicant’s right to privacy and reputation (section 25), right to take part in public life (section 23), right to further vocational education and training (section 36(2)), and right to a fair and public hearing (section 31) were relevant. The Tribunal concluded that its decision was compatible with human rights, such that the limit imposed by a non-publication order was found to be “reasonable and justifiable for the purposes of s 13”, although the Tribunal acknowledged that it limited the applicant’s right to a fair hearing (s 31(3)): at [153].

Visit the judgment: DM v Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2022] QCAT 199