Colebourne v State of Queensland (Queensland Police Service)

In the case of Colebourne v State of Queensland (Queensland Police Service), Ms Colebourne, an Acting Injury Management Advisor in the Queensland Police Service, sought a stay of a decision made by the Commissioner of the Queensland Police Service. The Commissioner had mandated that certain employees, unless exempted, must receive a COVID-19 vaccine, with a first dose by 4 October 2021. Ms Colebourne applied for exemption from the vaccination requirement, but her application was denied. She subsequently appealed this decision under the Public Service Act 2008 and applied for a stay of the decision pending the determination of her appeal under the Industrial Relations Act 2016.

The legal issues before the court were whether to exercise the discretion to grant a stay of the decision being appealed and, if so, on what terms. The court considered the relevant principles for granting a stay, including the balance of convenience and the competing rights of the parties. The court also assessed the prospects of success of Ms Colebourne's appeal, although it did not speculate on the merits of her case.

The court found that Ms Colebourne had not demonstrated a proper basis for a stay that would be fair to all parties. It held that the balance of convenience weighed against granting a stay, as the Commissioner's direction was aimed at protecting public health during a pandemic. The court also noted that the prospects of success of Ms Colebourne's appeal were poor, given the compelling reasons provided by the Commissioner for the vaccination mandate. Consequently, the court dismissed Ms Colebourne's application for a stay.

The court's final order was that the Applicant's application to stay the decision being appealed was dismissed. This meant that Ms Colebourne was required to comply with the Commissioner's direction to receive a COVID-19 vaccine within the specified timeframe, unless her appeal was successful.