Sam v Director General, Department of Justice and Attorney General
Case
•
[2020] QCAT 243
•20 January 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Sam v Director General, Department of Justice and Attorney General [2020] QCAT 243
[2020] QCAT 243
20 January 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of Sam v Director General, Department of Justice and Attorney General, the applicant contested a decision by the Director General of the Department of Justice and Attorney General to issue a negative notice under the Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld). The applicant had previously been charged with three historical sex offences against a child, but was acquitted by a jury in a District Court trial. The applicant had a historical criminal history, but the offence recorded was not considered a serious or disqualifying offence. The central legal issues were whether exceptional circumstances existed to warrant the negative notice, whether the potential risk to children was sufficiently negated, and whether it was in the best interests of children to issue a positive notice.
The court examined the concept of 'exceptional circumstances' under the Working with Children Act, which requires a case-by-case assessment based on individual facts and the interests of the parties. The tribunal has broad discretion in reviewing such cases and is not bound by traditional rules of evidence. The court found that the tribunal had not correctly applied the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness in making its decision. The tribunal failed to properly consider the applicant's acquittal and the lack of a serious or disqualifying offence in the applicant's criminal history. As a result, the court set aside the decision of the Director General and substituted its own decision that there was no exceptional case warranting a negative notice.
The court also addressed the non-publication of evidence to protect the identities of the applicant, their family, and non-parties. The court found that such publication was contrary to the public interest and ordered that the contents of documents and evidence produced during the tribunal proceedings should not be published to the extent that it could lead to the identification of the applicant or any related parties.
The court examined the concept of 'exceptional circumstances' under the Working with Children Act, which requires a case-by-case assessment based on individual facts and the interests of the parties. The tribunal has broad discretion in reviewing such cases and is not bound by traditional rules of evidence. The court found that the tribunal had not correctly applied the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness in making its decision. The tribunal failed to properly consider the applicant's acquittal and the lack of a serious or disqualifying offence in the applicant's criminal history. As a result, the court set aside the decision of the Director General and substituted its own decision that there was no exceptional case warranting a negative notice.
The court also addressed the non-publication of evidence to protect the identities of the applicant, their family, and non-parties. The court found that such publication was contrary to the public interest and ordered that the contents of documents and evidence produced during the tribunal proceedings should not be published to the extent that it could lead to the identification of the applicant or any related parties.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
Legal Concepts
-
Family Law and Child Welfare – Child Welfare under State or Territory Jurisdiction and Legislation – Generally
-
Natural Justice & Procedural Fairness
-
Admissibility of Evidence
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
DCR v Director-General Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2025] QCAT 228
Cases Citing This Decision
4
Cases Cited
13
Statutory Material Cited
5