SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
Petrie v Queensland Community Corrections Board [2006] QSC 188
PARTIES:
GAVIN JOHN PETRIE
(applicant)
v
QUEENSLAND COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS BOARD
(respondent)FILE NO/S:
BS 4393 of 2006
DIVISION:
Trial Division
PROCEEDING:
Application
ORIGINATING COURT:
Supreme Court of Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:
3 August 2006
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
19 July 2006
JUDGE:
Philippides J
ORDER:
The decision of the respondent evidenced in letters to the applicant dated 1 February 2006 and 28 April 2006 to refuse the application for post-prison community based release be set aside and the matter be referred back to the respondent for reconsideration.
CATCHWORDS:
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – GROUNDS OF REVIEW – JUDICIAL REVIEW – defective exercise of power – consideration of irrelevant matter – error of law – refusal by Queensland Community Corrections Board of application for post-prison community based release – where sentencing judge made a recommendation as to eligibility for post-prison community based release (PPCBR) and also recommended applicant undergo sex offenders treatment program while in custody – where applicant at all times willing to undergo sex offender program – where applicant unable to access program prior to date recommended by sentencing judge for eligibility for PPCBR – where application for PPCBR refused by Board – whether Board’s decision an improper exercise of power or otherwise contrary to law
Corrective Services Act 2000 (Qld), s 134
Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld), s 20, s 24(b)Williams v Queensland Community Corrections Board [2000] 1 Qd R 557
R v MacKenzie [2002] 1 Qd R 410
R v Maxfield [2002] 1 Qd R 417COUNSEL:
Applicant appeared in person
Mr J M Horton for the respondentSOLICITORS:
Applicant appeared in person
Crown Law for the respondent
PHILIPPIDES J:
Background
The applicant seeks judicial review of a decision by the respondent refusing him a post-prison community based release order (“PPCBR”).
On 2 August 2004 the applicant was sentenced on his plea for the offence of maintaining an unlawful relationship of a sexual nature with a child under 16. The applicant was sentenced to six years imprisonment with 433 days of pre-sentence custody being declared as time served. In sentencing the applicant, the learned sentencing judge observed that the applicant had, prior to the offending, been the child complainant’s teacher and that the offence involved a grave breach of trust, but noted that the applicant was of generally good character with a very slight criminal history and that there was no suggestion of physical force being used in connection with the offence. The offending was stated to have involved relatively few actual sexual incidents. The sentencing judge referred to a report by Dr Isailovic and stated that while it indicated that there was a risk of future offending, it was not significantly high, particularly if the applicant underwent treatment whilst in custody which he was willing to do.
The sentencing judge concluded that the matters in the applicant’s favour ought to be reflected in an early recommendation for PPCBR and recommended that the…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Petrie v Queensland Community Corrections Board and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2006] QSC 188
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Court determined that the Board's decision-making process was flawed. It was found that the Board had considered an irrelevant matter in its assessment, specifically, the fact that Petrie had not accessed the recommended treatment program before the recommended eligibility date for PPCBR. The Court held that this consideration was extraneous to the decision-making process and therefore, the Board's decision was defective. Furthermore, the Court concluded that the Board had made an error of law by not adhering strictly to the criteria for eligibility for PPCBR as recommended by the sentencing judge.
Given the aforementioned findings, the Court set aside the Board's decision to refuse Petrie's application for PPCBR. The Court ordered that the matter be referred back to the Board for reconsideration, ensuring that the Board properly adhered to the recommended eligibility criteria and did not improperly consider extraneous factors.
No additional orders were made beyond the setting aside of the Board's decision and the referral for reconsideration.
Orders
Orders of the court
The decision of the respondent evidenced in letters to the applicant dated 1 February 2006 and 28 April 2006 to refuse the application for post-prison community based release be set aside and the matter be referred back to the respondent for reconsideration.
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.