QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CITATION:
Acreman v Deputy Commissioner Pointing [2021] QCATA 133
PARTIES:
GEOFFREY OWEN ACREMAN
(applicant\appellant)
v
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BRETT POINTING
(respondent)
APPLICATION NOs:
APL109-19 & APL148-19
ORIGINATING NO:
OCR294-17
MATTER TYPE:
Appeals
DELIVERED ON:
24 September 2021
HEARING DATE:
13 May 2021
HEARD AT:
Brisbane
DECISION OF:
Senior Member Howard, Presiding Member
Member Richard Oliver
ORDERS:
1. Leave is granted for Geoffrey Owen Acreman to amend his grounds of appeal in accordance with his submissions filed on 7 November 2019 in APL109‑19 and APL148-19.
2. Leave is refused to Geoffrey Owen Acreman to rely upon additional evidence.
APL148-19
1. The appeal is allowed.
Matter 2
(a) The decision of the Tribunal concerning Matter 2 is confirmed.
Matter 3
2. The following decision is substituted:
(a) The finding that the conduct is substantiated is set aside.
(b) Matter 3 is not substantiated.
APL109-19
3. The appeal is allowed.
4. The Tribunal’s decision is set aside.
RECOMMENDATION TO CHIEF EXECUTIVE
5. Pursuant to s 24(3) of the QCAT Act, a copy of these reasons for decision be given by the Principal Registrar to the following:
(a) the Commissioner for Police with a recommendation that consideration be given to the adequacy of, and taking any necessary steps to ensure the adequacy, of the following:
(i) all relevant directions, manuals, practices and procedures for ensuring that all relevant information is considered and appropriately included in, acted upon, and/or disclosed as the case may be in disciplinary investigations and related disciplinary action to ensure that procedural fairness is observed; and
(ii) all directions, manuals, practices and procedures (including the procedures for authorisation and cessation of authorisation of officers access files of the Ethical Standards Command) for security and proper management of information held in databases about disciplinary investigations; and
(iii) training of police officers to facilitate recognition of and appropriate dealing with public interest disclosures made under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010 (Qld);
(b) Deputy Commissioner Brett Pointing.
6. A copy of these reasons for decision be given by the Principal Registrar to the Chair, Crime and Crime & Corruption Commission.
NON-PUBLICATION ORDER
7. Unless otherwise ordered, publication of the names of the complainant, the complainant’s partner and all police officers involved in receiving reports about and investigating the events the subject of the disciplinary charges is prohibited, other than in a deidentified manner.
8. Either party may file in the Appeal Tribunal and serve on the other party, an application for variation of the non-publication order in order 7, together with supporting submissions, within 28 days of these orders;
9. In the event that an application is made in accordance with order 8 above, the other party must file in the Appeal tribunal and serve on the party who made the application, any submissions in response, within 42 days of these orders; and
10. Unless otherwise ordered, any application for variation of the non-publication order will be decided on the papers without an oral hearing.
CATCHWORDS:
POLICE – INTERNAL…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Acreman v Deputy Commissioner Pointing and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2021] QCATA 133
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. It found that Acreman's access to the QPS computer system was not for an official purpose, thereby constituting misconduct. However, the court also considered whether Acreman's report of the confidential documents constituted a public interest disclosure. The court held that Acreman's actions did not qualify as such because he was already subject to disciplinary proceedings at the time. The court also considered whether Acreman was immune from disciplinary charges due to statutory provisions, but found that such immunity did not apply as Acreman was liable for his own misconduct.
The court allowed Acreman's appeal in part and set aside certain findings of the Tribunal. Acreman's appeal was allowed in relation to one of the charges, and the Tribunal's decision was set aside. The court confirmed the Tribunal's decision on another charge but set aside the finding that the conduct was substantiated. Acreman was not found to be liable for the third charge. The court recommended that the Commissioner for Police review relevant directions, manuals, practices and procedures to ensure procedural fairness and proper management of information in disciplinary investigations. The court also made an order prohibiting the publication of the names of the complainant, the complainant’s partner and all police officers involved, other than in a deidentified manner.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Leave is granted for Geoffrey Owen Acreman to amend his grounds of appeal in accordance with his submissions filed on 7 November 2019 in APL109‑19 and APL148-19.
2. Leave is refused to Geoffrey Owen Acreman to rely upon additional evidence.
APL148-19
1. The appeal is allowed.
Matter 2
(a) The decision of the Tribunal concerning Matter 2 is confirmed.
Matter 3
2. The following decision is substituted:
(a) The finding that the conduct is substantiated is set aside.
(b) Matter 3 is not substantiated.
APL109-19
3. The appeal is allowed.
4. The Tribunal’s decision is set aside.
RECOMMENDATION TO CHIEF EXECUTIVE
5. Pursuant to s 24(3) of the QCAT Act, a copy of these reasons for decision be given by the Principal Registrar to the following:
(a) the Commissioner for Police with a recommendation that consideration be given to the adequacy of, and taking any necessary steps to ensure the adequacy, of the following:
(i) all relevant directions, manuals, practices and procedures for ensuring that all relevant information is considered and appropriately included in, acted upon, and/or disclosed as the case may be in disciplinary investigations and related disciplinary action to ensure that procedural fairness is observed; and
(ii) all directions, manuals, practices and procedures (including the procedures for authorisation and cessation of authorisation of officers access files of the Ethical Standards Command) for security and proper management of information held in databases about disciplinary investigations; and
(iii) training of police officers to facilitate recognition of and appropriate dealing with public interest disclosures made under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010 (Qld);
(b) Deputy Commissioner Brett Pointing.
6. A copy of these reasons for decision be given by the Principal Registrar to the Chair, Crime and Crime & Corruption Commission.
NON-PUBLICATION ORDER
7. Unless otherwise ordered, publication of the names of the complainant, the complainant’s partner and all police officers involved in receiving reports about and investigating the events the subject of the disciplinary charges is prohibited, other than in a deidentified manner.
8. Either party may file in the Appeal Tribunal and serve on the other party, an application for variation of the non-publication order in order 7, together with supporting submissions, within 28 days of these orders;
9. In the event that an application is made in accordance with order 8 above, the other party must file in the Appeal tribunal and serve on the party who made the application, any submissions in response, within 42 days of these orders; and
10. Unless otherwise ordered, any application for variation of the non-publication order will be decided on the papers without an oral hearing.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.