Venables v State of Queensland (Queensland Health)

In the case of Venables v State of Queensland (Queensland Health), the Appellant, a Clinical Nurse Consultant employed by the State of Queensland, sought an exemption from the mandatory COVID-19 vaccination requirement stipulated in clause 8 of the Health Employment Directive No. 12/21. The Appellant's exemption request was denied, and after an internal review upheld the decision, she appealed to the court. The Appellant was subsequently dismissed from her employment, which led to the court's consideration of whether to hear the appeal given her change in employment status.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to proceed with the Appellant's appeal against the decision not to grant her exemption, given that she was no longer an employee at the time of the appeal. The court had to determine if there were compelling reasons to hear the appeal despite the Appellant's dismissal. The Appellant was invited to make written submissions regarding whether the appeal should proceed under these circumstances. The court had to balance the Appellant's right to seek review against the practical implications of the Appellant's dismissal.

The court concluded that it was not appropriate to hear the appeal because the Appellant was no longer an employee, and any decision on appeal would have no practical effect on her employment. The court found that this constituted a compelling reason to decline the appeal. Consequently, the court decided not to hear the appeal and issued an order pursuant to section 562A(3)(b)(iii) of the Industrial Relations Act 2016, affirming that the Appellant's appeal would not be heard.

In summary, the court declined to hear Ms Venables' appeal against the decision not to grant her exemption from the COVID-19 vaccination requirement. The primary reason for this decision was that Ms Venables was no longer an employee at the time of the appeal, and any ruling on the appeal would have no practical effect on her employment status.