Scott v Assistant Commissioner Peter Martin

Senior Constable Scott has brought an appeal against a decision made by Assistant Commissioner Peter Martin to impose a sanction following an incident in which Scott presented for work under the influence of alcohol. The Assistant Commissioner subjected Scott to targeted alcohol testing, which returned readings of.121% and.118%. Scott initially claimed she had caught a bus to work, however, her vehicle was later seen in the vicinity of the police station. On the following day, Scott admitted to driving to work. This was out of character for Scott, who was known to be subject to significant stressors. Scott subsequently completed a rehabilitation course and counselling. The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal was required to determine whether the Assistant Commissioner’s decision to sanction Scott was lawful, reasonable, procedurally fair and whether the sanction was proportionate.

The Tribunal found that the Assistant Commissioner’s decision to sanction Scott was lawful, reasonable, and procedurally fair. The Tribunal noted that it was not disputed that Scott had presented for work under the influence of alcohol, which constituted misconduct. The Tribunal found that the Assistant Commissioner had appropriately exercised his discretion in imposing a sanction on Scott. The Tribunal also found that the sanction imposed was proportionate to the misconduct. The Tribunal noted that Scott had largely completed the sanction imposed by the Assistant Commissioner, had initiated and completed a rehabilitation course and counselling, and had a meritorious record and references. The Tribunal found that the Assistant Commissioner’s decision to sanction Scott was therefore appropriate.

The decision of Assistant Commissioner Peter Martin is confirmed.