Scanlon v Director-General, Department of the Arts, Sport and Recreation

The Supreme Court of New South Wales Court of Appeal considered an appeal concerning the disciplinary proceedings against a Registrar. The appellant, Scanlon, sought to challenge the Director-General of the Department of the Arts, Sport and Recreation's decision to proceed with disciplinary action against him. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the Registrar was entitled to immunity from such proceedings due to the nature of the alleged misconduct, which occurred in the exercise of his judicial functions.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the Registrar, in performing his duties under the *Liquor Act 1982* and the *Public Sector Employment Management Act 2002*, was protected by judicial immunity from disciplinary proceedings. This required the court to determine the scope of judicial immunity and its applicability to a public servant who also exercised judicial or quasi-judicial functions.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the principles of judicial immunity, holding that it extends to protect judicial officers from liability for acts done in the exercise of their judicial functions, even if those acts are alleged to be malicious or in bad faith. However, the Court distinguished between immunity from civil liability and immunity from disciplinary proceedings. It reasoned that while judicial immunity protects against lawsuits, it does not necessarily shield a public servant from accountability for their conduct within the public service framework. The Court found that the Registrar's role, while involving the exercise of judicial functions, did not place him entirely outside the purview of disciplinary action under the relevant public sector employment legislation.

The appeal was dismissed, and Scanlon was ordered to pay the costs of the Director-General.