Garland v Chief Executive, Department of Corrective Services

Garland brought an application for judicial review against the Chief Executive of the Department of Corrective Services in the Queensland Supreme Court, challenging decisions made by two of the respondent’s delegates to impose maximum security orders on the applicant. The respondent considered the applicant to be a substantial threat to the security or good order of the facility. The applicant argued that the decisions were unreasonable and constituted inhumane containment. The court was required to determine whether the decisions were made by improperly exercising power, considering irrelevant considerations, or being unreasonable, and whether the decisions were contrary to the purpose of the Corrective Services Act.

The court found that the decisions were not unreasonable and were made on reasonable grounds. The respondent had considered all relevant factors, including the applicant’s criminal history and behaviour during other terms spent in custody, and had not given undue weight to these factors. The court held that the respondent’s belief that the applicant was a substantial threat to the security or good order of the facility was based on reasonable grounds, and the decisions were not contrary to the purpose of the Corrective Services Act.

The court dismissed the applications for review and the application pursuant to section 48 of the Judicial Review Act 1991. The court found that the decisions were not made by improperly exercising power or considering irrelevant considerations, and that the decisions were not unreasonable. The court held that the applicant had not demonstrated that the decisions were so unreasonable that no reasonable decision-maker could have made the decisions. The court found that the decisions were in accordance with the law and the purpose of the Corrective Services Act.