Johnston v State of Queensland (Department of Education)

Johnston v State of Queensland (Department of Education) involved a teacher who was charged with criminal offences but subsequently acquitted. Despite this, the appellant was suspended without remuneration and his teacher registration was suspended. The appellant sought reimbursement for the period of suspension without remuneration, which was denied by the Department of Education. The appeal was heard in the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission, focusing on whether the denial of reimbursement was fair and reasonable.

The central legal issue was whether the decision not to reimburse the appellant was fair and reasonable. The respondent argued that the appeal should not proceed because the appellant had not first used the grievance procedures as required by the Appeals Directive. However, the court found that it would be unreasonable to require the appellant to first use the grievance procedures given the circumstances. The court also determined that the decision not to reimburse the appellant was not fair and reasonable.

The court concluded that the appeal should proceed, rejecting the respondent's jurisdictional argument. The decision maker, although not the chief executive, was someone to whom the chief executive had delegated the decision-making power, as defined in the relevant directives. Consequently, the decision not to reimburse the appellant was found to be unfair and unreasonable. The appeal was allowed, and the decision of 29 May 2023 was set aside. The respondent was ordered to reimburse the appellant for the period of suspension without remuneration, from 3 February 2022 to 7 May 2023.