Schafer v Acting Deputy Commissioner Tony Wright - [2020] QCAT 108

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Schafer v Acting Deputy Commissioner Tony Wright [2020] QCAT 108

PARTIES:

RICHARD SCHAFER
(applicant)

v

ACTING DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TONY WRIGHT

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

OCR318-19

MATTER TYPE:

Occupational regulation matters

DELIVERED ON:

23 January 2020

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Senior Member Aughterson

ORDERS:

The Crime and Corruption Commission is joined as the second respondent in the proceeding.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION AND OF PARTIES – PARTIES – GENERALLY – where application to be joined as party to police disciplinary review proceeding – where applicant does not oppose joinder of Crime and Corruption Commission as passive respondent – where applicant seeks direction to be joined as passive second respondent only - whether the Tribunal may make directions limiting right of second respondent to be heard

Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld), s 15, s 47, s 48, Schedule 2

Police Service Administration (Discipline Reform) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2019 (Qld),

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 22(3), s 32(2), s 40(1)(d), s 41, s 42(1), s 47(3),
s 48(4), s 52(6), s 53(4), s 58(2), s 59(3), s 61(4), s 62(6), s 63(5), s 66(3), s 73(3), s 90(4), s 95, s 97(2), s 99(3),
s 111(3)(b), s 118(3), s 122(2), s 133(2), s 135(2),
s 138(1), s 142(1)

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Practice Direction No 3 of 2013

State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 32(1), s 34(1)

Aldrich v Ross [2001] 2 Qd R 235

Annetts and Another v McCann and Others (1990) 170 CLR 596

Boral Resources (Vic) Pty Ltd & Ors v CFMEU [2013] VSC 572

Chapman v Wilson and Anor [2011] QCAT 400

Crime and Misconduct Commission v Wilson & Anor [2012] QCA 314

Croton v Healy [2013] QCAT 547

Fardon v Attorney-General (Qld) [2004] 223 CLR 575

Gandini v Legal Profession Complaints Committee [2012] WASC 428

Groufsky v Crime and Misconduct Commission and Anor [2012] QCATA 188

HD & BHW v Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services [2018] QCAT 17

Hotrod Mobile Welding Services v Suncity Holdings Qld Pty Ltd [2013] QCATA 170

Kioa v West (1985) 159 CLR 550

Laing & Anor v Kokkinos & Anor (No 2) [2013] QCATA 247

Lee v Crime and Corruption Commission & Anor (2016) 259 A Crim R 96

O’Brien v Assistant Commissioner Paul Taylor [2018] QCAT 373

Officer Carey v Assistant Commissioner Mickelson [2019] QCAT 109

Page v Jobbins [2016] QCATA 147

Re Nolan; Ex parte Young (1991) 172 CLR 460

Strickland (a pseudonym) v DPP (Cth) [2018] HCA 53

Zaoui v Attorney-General (No 2) [2004] NZCA 244

APPEARANCES

The matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld).

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Crime and Corruption Commission (‘the Commission’) has applied to be joined as a respondent in proceedings to review a disciplinary decision…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Schafer v Acting Deputy Commissioner Tony Wright 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

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2020] QCAT 108
Decision Date: 23 January 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court involved an application by Schafer to join the Crime and Corruption Commission as a party in a police disciplinary review proceeding. Schafer, the applicant, sought to be joined as a passive second respondent only, without opposing the joinder of the Commission as a passive respondent. The Acting Deputy Commissioner Tony Wright was the primary respondent in the disciplinary review proceeding. The central issue before the court was whether the Tribunal had the authority to issue directions that would restrict the rights of a second respondent to be heard in such proceedings.

In addressing the matter, the court examined the statutory provisions and relevant case law concerning the powers of tribunals in disciplinary review proceedings. The court found that while tribunals have the discretion to manage the proceedings to ensure they are conducted fairly and efficiently, this discretion is not unlimited. The court emphasised that any limitation on a party's right to be heard must be carefully considered and justified. The court concluded that the Tribunal could not make directions that would unduly restrict the rights of the second respondent without a compelling reason. The court held that the Tribunal had the authority to join the Commission as a passive second respondent but could not impose limitations on the second respondent's right to be heard without proper justification.

As a result of the court's determination, the Crime and Corruption Commission was joined as the second respondent in the proceeding. The court's decision underscored the importance of ensuring that all parties have an adequate opportunity to be heard in disciplinary review proceedings, while also recognising the need for tribunals to manage proceedings effectively.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Crime and Corruption Commission is joined as the second respondent in the proceeding.

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.

CITATION:	Schafer v Acting Deputy Commissioner Tony Wright [2020] QCAT 108
PARTIES:	RICHARD SCHAFER (applicant)
v
ACTING DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TONY WRIGHT (respondent)
APPLICATION NO/S:	OCR318-19
MATTER TYPE:	Occupational regulation matters
DELIVERED ON:	23 January 2020
HEARING DATE:	On the papers
HEARD AT:	Brisbane
DECISION OF:	Senior Member Aughterson
ORDERS:	The Crime and Corruption Commission is joined as the second respondent in the proceeding.
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION AND OF PARTIES – PARTIES – GENERALLY – where application to be joined as party to police disciplinary review proceeding – where applicant does not oppose joinder of Crime and Corruption Commission as passive respondent – where applicant seeks direction to be joined as passive second respondent only - whether the Tribunal may make directions limiting right of second respondent to be heard Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld), s 15, s 47, s 48, Schedule 2 Police Service Administration (Discipline Reform) and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2019 (Qld), Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 22(3), s 32(2), s 40(1)(d), s 41, s 42(1), s 47(3), s 48(4), s 52(6), s 53(4), s 58(2), s 59(3), s 61(4), s 62(6), s 63(5), s 66(3), s 73(3), s 90(4), s 95, s 97(2), s 99(3), s 111(3)(b), s 118(3), s 122(2), s 133(2), s 135(2), s 138(1), s 142(1) Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Practice Direction No 3 of 2013 State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 32(1), s 34(1) Aldrich v Ross [2001] 2 Qd R 235 Annetts and Another v McCann and Others (1990) 170 CLR 596 Boral Resources (Vic) Pty Ltd & Ors v CFMEU [2013] VSC 572 Chapman v Wilson and Anor [2011] QCAT 400 Crime and Misconduct Commission v Wilson & Anor [2012] QCA 314 Croton v Healy [2013] QCAT 547 Fardon v Attorney-General (Qld) [2004] 223 CLR 575 Gandini v Legal Profession Complaints Committee [2012] WASC 428 Groufsky v Crime and Misconduct Commission and Anor [2012] QCATA 188 HD & BHW v Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services [2018] QCAT 17 Hotrod Mobile Welding Services v Suncity Holdings Qld Pty Ltd [2013] QCATA 170 Kioa v West (1985) 159 CLR 550 Laing & Anor v Kokkinos & Anor (No 2) [2013] QCATA 247 Lee v Crime and Corruption Commission & Anor (2016) 259 A Crim R 96 O’Brien v Assistant Commissioner Paul Taylor [2018] QCAT 373 Officer Carey v Assistant Commissioner Mickelson [2019] QCAT 109 Page v Jobbins [2016] QCATA 147 Re Nolan; Ex parte Young (1991) 172 CLR 460 Strickland (a pseudonym) v DPP (Cth) [2018] HCA 53 Zaoui v Attorney-General (No 2) [2004] NZCA 244