Cherry v State of Queensland

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal from the Supreme Court of Queensland in a dispute between Cherry and the State of Queensland. The case concerned the interpretation and application of certain provisions of the *Corrective Services Act 2018* (Qld) and the *Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010* (Qld) in the context of a prisoner's disclosures.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the prisoner, Mr Cherry, was entitled to protection under the *Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010* (Qld) for disclosures he made concerning alleged misconduct within the correctional system. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the protections afforded by that Act extended to a prisoner making disclosures about matters occurring within a correctional facility, and if so, under what circumstances.

The Court's reasoning focused on the statutory language of both Acts and their interplay. It was held that the *Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010* (Qld) is intended to provide broad protection for disclosures of wrongdoing, and that there was no explicit exclusion of prisoners from its ambit. The Court considered the purpose of the Act, which is to encourage and facilitate the disclosure of wrongdoing in the public sector, and concluded that a prisoner making disclosures about misconduct within the correctional system falls within the scope of the Act. The Court analysed the definition of "discloser" and "public officer" within the relevant legislation, finding that the prisoner's status did not preclude him from being a discloser, nor did the subject of his disclosures necessarily remove them from the purview of public interest disclosures.

The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that Mr Cherry was entitled to the protections afforded by the *Public Interest Disclosure Act 2010* (Qld) in relation to the disclosures he made. The matter was remitted to the Supreme Court of Queensland for further proceedings consistent with the High Court's judgment.