Griffith University v Tang

[2005] HCA 7

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

GLEESON CJ,
GUMMOW, KIRBY, CALLINAN AND HEYDON JJ

GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   APPELLANT

AND

VIVIAN TANG  RESPONDENT

Griffith University v Tang [2005] HCA 7

3 March 2005
B19/2004

ORDER

1.        Appeal allowed.

2.Set aside the order of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Queensland made on 19 December 2003 and in its place order:

(a)the appeal to that Court is allowed;

(b)set aside the orders of the Supreme Court of Queensland (Mackenzie J) made on 14 February 2003 and in their place order that the application for a statutory order of review is dismissed;

(c)the University pay the costs of the appeal to the Court of Appeal;

(d)the question of the costs of the application before Mackenzie J is remitted to the Supreme Court of Queensland.

3.The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal to this Court.

On appeal from the Supreme Court of Queensland

Representation:

P A Keane QC with S E Brown for the appellant (instructed by Minter Ellison)

A J H Morris QC with J P Murphy for the respondent (instructed by Dibbs Barker Gosling)

Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

CATCHWORDS

Griffith University v Tang

Administrative law – Judicial review – Exclusion of respondent from PhD candidature programme conducted by appellant – Where appellant is a body created by statute – Power of appellant to function as a university and to confer higher education awards derived from statute – Whether exclusion was a decision to which the Judicial Review Act 1991 (Q) applied – Whether exclusion was a decision made under an enactment – Relevance of nature of relationship subsisting between parties.

Words and phrases – "decision", "under an enactment", "of an administrative character", "required or authorised", "aggrieved by".

Judicial Review Act 1991 (Q), ss 4, 5, 7(1)(a), 16(1), 20, 48.
Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth), ss 3, 5(1).
Griffith University Act 1998 (Q), ss 5, 6, 8, 9, 11.

1. GLEESON CJ.   The respondent brought proceedings in the Supreme Court of Queensland seeking review under the Judicial Review Act 1991 (Q) of a decision to exclude her from the PhD candidature programme conducted by the appellant. The decision was made on the ground that she had "undertaken research without regard to ethical and scientific standards" and had thereby engaged in "academic misconduct". The finding that there had been misconduct, and that exclusion was the appropriate response, was made by an Assessment Board, which was a sub-committee of the Research and Postgraduate Studies Committee of Griffith University. The respondent pursued an appeal procedure within the University. An Appeals Committee concluded that misconduct had occurred, that exclusion was appropriate, and that the appeal should be dismissed. The respondent contends that, at both levels, there were breaches of the requirements of natural justice, failures to comply with mandatory procedural requirements, improper exercises of power, and errors of law.

2. In her application for review, the respondent…