Peri v Chief Executive Officer, Public Safety Business Agency

Case [2015] QCAT 56


CITATION: Peri v Chief Executive Officer, Public Safety Business Agency [2015] QCAT 56
PARTIES: Cyrus Harry Peri
(Applicant)
v
Chief Executive Officer, Public Safety Business Agency
(Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER: CML162-14
MATTER TYPE: Childrens matters
HEARING DATE: 6 February 2015
HEARD AT: Southport
DECISION OF: Member Joachim
DELIVERED ON: 11 February 2015
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
ORDERS MADE: 1.    The decision of the Public Safety Business Agency to issue Cyrus Harry Peri with a negative notice is set aside and he is to be issued with a positive notice and blue card.
CATCHWORDS:

Blue Card – exceptional case – where applicant has charges and offences for manslaughter and assault – where applicant’s violent behaviours have been alcohol fuelled – where applicant has self limited alcohol use – where protective factors outweigh risk factors – whether applicant’s case is exceptional

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 20, s 22
Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld), s 5, s 6, s 221, s 226, s 360

Commissioner for Children and Young People and Child Guardian v Maher & Anor [2004] QCA 492
HT v Chief Executive Officer, Public Safety Business Agency [2015] QCAT 55
Re TAA [2006] QCST 11

APPEARANCES:

APPLICANT: Mr Cyrus Harry Peri
RESPONDENT: Public Safety Business Agency

REPRESENTATIVES:

APPLICANT: Self
RESPONDENT: Mr P Reid

REASONS FOR DECISION

  1. Mr Cyrus Peri is 33 years of age. He lives on the Gold Coast and works part time, combined with caring for his infant child. He wishes to obtain a licence to coach boxing.

  2. The Public Safety Business Agency which has responsibility for the issuing of positive notices and blue cards, issued him with a negative notice on 25 July 2014.

  3. Mr Peri seeks a review of that decision so he can obtain a licence to coach boxing.

  4. Mr Peri has a criminal history from 2003 until 2010. Most of this history involves public nuisance and assault charges. For most of these he was fined. He was charged with manslaughter in 2008 in New South Wales. He was found not guilty in 2010. Shortly after his acquittal he was involved in a violent fracas in Surfers Paradise. Most of his charges and offences arose from alcohol fuelled violence.

  5. As none of his offences are serious offences under the legislation, Mr Peri is entitled to receive a positive notice and blue card unless it is considered his is an exceptional case such that it would harm the best interests of children for him to have a positive notice.[1]

    [1]Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld) s 221.

  6. The Tribunal is conducting a review of the merits of the Agency’s decision by way of a fresh hearing.[2] The Tribunal needs to apply the same law as the Agency. The Tribunal has to take into account s 226 of the Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld) (‘Working with Children Act’). This outlines what I have to consider in deciding if…

Continue reading Peri v Chief Executive Officer, Public Safety Business Agenc...

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Peri v Chief Executive Officer, Public Safety Business Agency [2015] QCAT 56
Case
[2015] QCAT 56
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Peri v Chief Executive Officer, Public Safety Business Agency involved Cyrus Harry Peri, the applicant, who contested the decision of the Public Safety Business Agency to deny him a blue card. The dispute centred around the assessment of Peri's eligibility for a blue card, which is required for certain roles involving vulnerable individuals. Peri had past charges and convictions for manslaughter and assault, and his behaviours had been alcohol-related. Despite these issues, Peri argued that his case should be considered exceptional.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Peri's case qualified as an exceptional circumstance under the relevant legislation, allowing him to obtain a blue card despite his criminal history. The court had to weigh the risk factors presented by Peri's past violent behaviours against the protective factors that suggested he had taken steps to mitigate these risks, such as self-limiting his alcohol use. The court's decision hinged on determining whether these protective factors sufficiently outweighed the risk factors.

The court concluded that Peri's case was indeed exceptional. It found that the protective factors, including his commitment to self-limiting alcohol use and his proactive steps towards rehabilitation, outweighed the risk factors posed by his past violent behaviours. The court recognised that Peri's history, while serious, did not necessarily predict future conduct of the same nature, especially given his efforts to manage his alcohol consumption. As a result, the court set aside the Public Safety Business Agency's decision to issue Peri with a negative notice, and ordered that he be issued with a positive notice and a blue card.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The decision of the Public Safety Business Agency to issue Cyrus Harry Peri with a negative notice is set aside and he is to be issued with a positive notice and blue card.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.