Craddock v Chief Executive, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation

The applicant in this matter sought a stay of the decision of the Chief Executive of the Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation to terminate her employment. The applicant argued that the termination was not justified, and that she should be allowed to continue working pending the outcome of her appeal. The matter was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

The central legal issue was whether the Tribunal had the authority to grant a stay of the decision under section 22 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act. The Tribunal had to consider whether the applicant's application satisfied the criteria for a stay, which included whether there was a serious question to be tried and whether the balance of convenience favoured a stay. The Tribunal also had to consider the public interest and the financial hardship that would be suffered by the applicant if the decision was not stayed.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had established a serious question to be tried, as there were genuine issues to be determined in the appeal. The Tribunal also found that the balance of convenience favoured a stay, as the applicant would suffer significant financial hardship if she was forced to leave her job while the appeal was being heard. The Tribunal further found that the public interest would not be prejudiced if the decision was stayed, as the applicant had been employed for a significant period of time and there was no evidence that she posed a risk to the public or to her employer. Based on these findings, the Tribunal granted the application for a stay.

The Tribunal stayed the decision of the Chief Executive of the Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation until further order, pending the outcome of the applicant's appeal. The applicant was therefore allowed to continue working while the appeal was being heard.