Newman v Commissioner for Police

In this matter, the applicant, Mr Gregory Newman, a police officer with the Queensland Police Service, sought a review of the decision of the respondent, the Commissioner for Police, which related to the substantiation of a charge of misconduct and the sanction imposed. Mr Newman applied for a position of Senior Sergeant within the QPS and submitted an application that included comments that were allegedly made by Inspector Flori. An investigation into the matter found that the application contained false and misleading information. Mr Newman disputes the substantiation of the charge and the sanction imposed by the QPS. The Tribunal found that the charge was substantiated, but the sanction was excessive. The Tribunal ordered that the decision of the QPS to substantiate the charge be confirmed and that a sanction of reprimand be imposed in lieu of a deduction in salary or wages.

The Tribunal was required to decide whether the disciplinary charge against Mr Newman was substantiated and whether the sanction imposed was excessive. The Tribunal found that the charge was substantiated as Mr Newman had added words to a comment purportedly made by Inspector Flori to make his application more attractive to the selection panel. The Tribunal also found that the sanction imposed by the QPS was excessive and substituted a reprimand in lieu of the original sanction. The Tribunal had regard to the purpose of disciplinary proceedings and all of the circumstances, including the comparatives relied upon by Mr Newman, in determining the appropriate sanction. The Tribunal found that a reprimand was a more appropriate sanction in all of the circumstances.