FMA v Chief Executive Officer, Public Safety Business Agency

The applicant, FMA, sought a review of a decision made by the Chief Executive Officer of the Public Safety Business Agency (PSBA), which refused to issue a positive notice for a blue card under the Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld) (WWC Act). The PSBA had issued a negative notice to FMA, citing his history of charges for breach of domestic violence protection orders, and the applicant argued that his case constituted an "exceptional case" under section 221(2) of the WWC Act. The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) was tasked with determining whether the PSBA's decision was correct and preferable, and whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to issue a positive notice if it found that FMA's case was not exceptional.

The central legal issue was whether the Tribunal had the jurisdiction to make orders to issue a positive notice or a blue card to the applicant if it found that his case was not exceptional. The PSBA argued that the Tribunal's jurisdiction was limited to reviewing whether FMA's case was exceptional, and that it could not make orders to issue a positive notice. The applicant contended that if the Tribunal found his case was not exceptional, it should have the power to order the issuance of a positive notice. The Tribunal also needed to consider whether FMA's history of charges, coupled with his mental health issues, constituted an exceptional case under the WWC Act.

The Tribunal found that the PSBA's decision was not the correct and preferable decision and set it aside. It determined that FMA's case was not exceptional under section 221(2) of the WWC Act, as the charges were not serious and he had undergone extensive psychological treatment. The Tribunal held that it had the jurisdiction to make orders to issue a positive notice if it found the case was not exceptional. The Tribunal issued a direction for further submissions from both parties and scheduled a further hearing to consider any additional orders that might be necessary. The Tribunal also directed that the publication of evidence be prohibited to protect the identity of any children mentioned in the proceeding.