Taylor v O'Beirne

[2010] QCA 188

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Taylor v O’Beirne & Ors [2010] QCA 188

PARTIES:

ASHLEY EARLE TAYLOR
(applicant/appellant)
v
KARRYN O’BEIRNE
(first respondent)
ROBERT WILDIN
(second respondent)
KATRINA YORK
(third respondent)
ANGELA MOY
(fourth respondent/not a party to the appeal)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No 58 of 2010
SC No 5312 of 2009

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

General Civil Appeal

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

27 July 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

25 June 2010

JUDGES:

Fraser, Chesterman and White JJA
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

Appeal dismissed with costs

CATCHWORDS:

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – JUDICIAL REVIEW – POWERS OF COURTS UNDER JUDICIAL REVIEW LEGISLATION – DECLARATIONS – where applicant was subject to a supervision order under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) (the Act) – where corrective services sent six letters to applicant advising of his failure to abide by certain terms of the order and warning him future failures may result in Supreme Court proceedings – where four letters were headed “formal censure” and two headed “notice of contravention of supervision order” – where applicant sought a statutory order of review of the “decisions” evidenced in the letters – where applicant was out of time and trial judge refused to extend time – whether the letters gave rise to a legal controversy or affected the applicant’s rights – whether the writing of the letters was within the respondents’ powers under the Act – whether the applicant was entitled to declarations that the letters were unlawful or infringed some right of the applicant

Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld), s 8(2)(b)(i), s 13, s 15, s 16, s 20, s 21, s 22, s 43B
Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld), s 4, s 26(2), s 43

Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission (1992) 175 CLR 564; [1992] HCA 10, distinguished
Anthony Hordern & Sons Ltd v Amalgamated Clothing and Allied Trades Union of Australia (1932) 47 CLR 1; [1932] HCA 9, cited
Bass v Permanent Trustee Co Ltd (1999) 198 CLR 334; [1999] HCA 9, applied
Gouriet v Union of Post Office Workers [1978] AC 435; [1977] UKHL 5, cited
Guaranty Trust Company of New York v Hannay & Company [1915] 2 KB 536, cited

COUNSEL:

J W Fenton for the appellant
J M Horton for the respondents

SOLICITORS:

Fisher Dore for the appellant
Crown Law for the respondents

1. FRASER JA:  I have had the advantage of reading the reasons for judgment of Chesterman JA.  I agree with those reasons and with the order proposed by his Honour.

1. CHESTERMAN JA: On 28 March 2008 Martin J made an interim supervision order pursuant to s 8(2)(b)(i) of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (“the Act”) subjecting the applicant to the requirements of a supervision order. Relevantly his Honour ordered that the applicant, when released from custody, be supervised until an application…