Crime and Corruption Commission v Shearer - [2022] QCATA 182

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Crime and Corruption Commission v Shearer [2022] QCATA 182

PARTIES:

crime and corruption commission

(applicant/appellant)

v

naomi c’ann shearer

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

APL196-21

ORIGINATING APPLICATION NO/S:

OCR024-20

MATTER TYPE:

Appeals

DELIVERED ON:

21 December 2022

HEARING DATE:

24 August 2022

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Senior Member Aughterson

ORDERS:

1. In relation to grounds 1 and 3 of the application for leave to appeal or appeal, leave to appeal is refused.

2. The appeal is otherwise dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – RIGHT OF APPEAL – WHEN APPEAL LIES – OTHER CASES – where a breath test was not administered to a driver at a vehicle interception as a result of statements made by the respondent police officer – where the appellant applied to the Tribunal for a finding of corrupt conduct and a sanction of dismissal – where the Tribunal at first instance found that the respondent police officer had engaged in corrupt conduct at the vehicle interception – where the Tribunal at first instance found that dishonesty had not been established in relation to a subsequent interview given by the respondent – where appeal raises question of law and question of mixed fact and law – whether the Tribunal at first instance erred in its finding in relation to dishonesty in the subsequent interview – whether the Tribunal at first instance erred in its interpretation of s 15(1) of the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld)

Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld), s 15
Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 (NSW), s 8

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 142

Berry v Treasure [2021] QCATA 61

Burke v Commissioner of Police [2019] QCA 158
Crime and Corruption Commission v Assistant Commissioner Paul Taylor & Anor [2018] QCAT 80
Crime and Corruption Commission v Shearer [2021] QCAT 215
Duncan v Independent Commission Against Corruption [2014] NSWSC 1018
Independent Commission Against Corruption v Cunneen (2015) 256 CLR 1
Pickering v McArthur [2005] QCA 294
Springfield v Duncombe [2017] NSWCA 137

Warren v Coombes (1979) 142 CLR 531

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

Appellant:

MJ Copley, of Counsel, instructed by the appellant

Respondent:

JR Hunter QC, instructed by Gnech & Associates

REASONS FOR DECISION

This is an appeal from a decision of the Tribunal in relation to a police disciplinary matter. The appellant was the applicant before the Tribunal at first instance. The Tribunal at first instance considered three disciplinary charges of corrupt conduct. A central issue on the appeal is the proper interpretation of s 15(1) of the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld) (‘the CC Act’), which defines the term ‘corrupt conduct’; in particular, the meaning of the term ‘conduct … that … could adversely affect’ the performance of functions or exercise of powers and the term ‘conduct … that … could result’ in the performance of functions or exercise of powers that ‘is not honest or is not impartial’.
The events giving rise to the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Crime and Corruption Commission v Shearer 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

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2022] QCATA 182
Decision Date: 21 December 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Crime and Corruption Commission v Shearer involved the appellant, the Crime and Corruption Commission, appealing a decision made by the Tribunal. The appellant sought a finding of corrupt conduct and a sanction of dismissal against the respondent, a police officer, following an incident at a vehicle interception where a breath test was not administered due to statements made by the officer. The Tribunal found that the officer had engaged in corrupt conduct but did not establish dishonesty in a subsequent interview. The appeal raised questions of law and mixed fact and law, focusing on whether the Tribunal erred in its findings of dishonesty and in its interpretation of section 15(1) of the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld).

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the Tribunal erred in its finding that the officer was not dishonest during the subsequent interview and whether the Tribunal's interpretation of section 15(1) of the Act was correct. The court needed to determine if the evidence supported the Tribunal's conclusion that the officer was not dishonest, and whether the Tribunal's understanding of the statutory provision was appropriate. These issues were pivotal in assessing the validity of the Tribunal's findings and the subsequent sanctions imposed.

The court examined the evidence and the Tribunal's reasoning in detail, concluding that the Tribunal's findings were supported by the evidence. The court held that there was no error in the Tribunal's determination regarding the officer's dishonesty in the subsequent interview. Additionally, the court found that the Tribunal's interpretation of section 15(1) of the Act was consistent with the statutory language and legislative intent. As a result, the appeal was dismissed in its entirety, and the original findings of the Tribunal were upheld.

The orders of the court were that leave to appeal was refused in relation to grounds 1 and 3 of the application, and the appeal was dismissed otherwise. This outcome meant that the Tribunal's findings of corrupt conduct and the sanctions imposed on the police officer remained in place.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. In relation to grounds 1 and 3 of the application for leave to appeal or appeal, leave to appeal is refused.

2. The appeal is otherwise dismissed.

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.