Queensland College of Teachers v ATL
[2018] QCAT 303
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Queensland College of Teachers v ATL[2018] QCAT 303
- Add to List
Queensland College of Teachers v ATL[2018] QCAT 303
Queensland College of Teachers v ATL[2018] QCAT 303
QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CITATION: | Queensland College of Teachers v ATL [2018] QCAT 303 |
PARTIES: | QUEENSLAND COLLEGE OF TEACHERS (applicant) v TEACHER ATL (respondent) |
APPLICATION NO/S: | OCR193-18 |
MATTER TYPE: | Occupational regulation matters |
DELIVERED ON: | 6 September 2018 |
HEARING DATE: | On the papers |
HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
DECISION OF: | Senior Member Aughterson |
ORDERS: |
|
CATCHWORDS: | EDUCATION – TRAINING AND REGISTRATION OF TEACHERS – suspension of teacher – where Queensland College of Teachers suspended the teacher’s registration on the basis of its belief that the teacher poses an unacceptable risk of harm to children – whether the teacher does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm – whether suspension should continue Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld), s 3(1), s 7, s 49, s 50(1), s 50(5), s 53(1), s 53(3), s 54(1)(b), s 55(6) Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 66 M v M (1988) 166 CLR 69 Queensland College of Teachers v LDW [2017] QCAT 048 Queensland College of Teachers v Teacher GXM [2016] QCAT 441 |
REPRESENTATION: |
|
Applicant: | Self-represented |
Respondent: | Self-represented |
APPEARANCES: |
|
This 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
- [1]ATL has been registered in Queensland as a teacher since 2010. On 9 July 2018, the Queensland College of Teachers (‘QCT’) suspended his registration pursuant to s 49 of the Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld) (‘the Act’).
The Legislative Framework
- [2]By s 49 of the Act, the QCT may suspend a teacher’s registration if it reasonably believes the teacher poses an unacceptable risk of harm to children. By s 50(1), the QCT must give notice of the suspension to the teacher, which notice includes a statement that the Tribunal will review the continuation of the suspension to decide whether the teacher poses an unacceptable risk of harm to children.[1]
- [3]In accordance with s 50(5) of the Act, the QCT has referred the continuation of the suspension to QCAT for review pursuant to s 53 of the Act. By s 53(1) the Tribunal must decide whether to continue the suspension, while s 53(3) requires the Tribunal to continue the suspension unless satisfied that the teacher does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children.
- [4]As required by s 54(1)(b) of the Act, directions were made by the Tribunal inviting submissions from ATL as to why he does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children. ATL has indicated through his legal representative that in declining to make submissions he made no admissions. The QCT filed written submissions in response.[2]
What is an unacceptable risk of harm to children?
- [5]While the Act does not define the term ‘unacceptable risk of harm’, the meaning of ‘harm’ is provided in s 7 of the Act:
- (1)Harm, to a child, is any detrimental effect of a significant nature on the child’s physical, psychological or emotional wellbeing.
- (2)It is immaterial how the harm is caused.
- (3)Harm can be caused by—
- (a)physical, psychological or emotional abuse or neglect; or
- (b)sexual abuse or exploitation.
- (4)Harm can be caused by—
- (a)a single act, omission or circumstance; or
- (b)a series or combination of acts, omissions or circumstances.
- [6]In Queensland College of Teachers v LDW, the Tribunal referred to the decision in M v M,[3] which considered the issue of risk of abuse in the context of parental access to a child, and stated:
The Court in that case formulated the issue as ensuring the protection of a child from ‘unacceptable risk of abuse’. The QCT submits, and I accept, that this formulation directs the Tribunal to an assessment of the ‘chances’ of the risk occurring and the magnitude of potential harm if it did occur, and requires a balancing exercise of advantages and detriments.[4]
By the terms of s 53(3)(b) of the Act, it is not required that the Tribunal be satisfied that there is an unacceptable risk of harm.[5] Rather the sub-section is cast in negative terms. The Tribunal must decide to continue the suspension unless satisfied that the teacher does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children.
The grounds of ATL’s suspension
- [7]The notice of suspension sets out QCT’s reasons for forming the view that ATL posed an unacceptable risk of harm to children. In summary, the reasons were that ATL:
- had a sexual relationship with a student;
- allowed the student to stay overnight at his house, went on a holiday with the student and engaged in overfamiliar, affectionate and/or inappropriate communication with the student through text messages and social media;
- gave the student preferential treatment in the form of extra assistance with school work; and
- had relationships with two other former students.
- [8]The QCT filed the material on which the decision was based, namely:
- (a)Transcripts of interviews;
- (b)Photographs of text messages; and
- (c)Emails and attachments.
- (a)
The Submissions
- [9]ATL has indicated through his legal representative that he makes no submissions in response, and in doing so makes no admissions. It is the submission of QCT that the suspension should continue.
Conclusion
- [10]On the material before me, I am not satisfied that the teacher ATL does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children. I therefore order that the suspension of ATL’s registration as a teacher is to continue.
- [11]I note that under s 55(6) of the Act, ATL may apply within 28 days of the notice of this decision to QCAT for review of this decision. He may at that point provide any additional material which may support a submission that he does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children.
Non-publication order
- [12]Pursuant to s 66(1)(c) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) the Tribunal can make an order prohibiting the publication of information that may enable a person who has appeared before the Tribunal to be identified. The Tribunal may do so on the application of a party or on its own initiative.[6]
- [13]The QCT submits that it is in the interests of justice for the Tribunal to make a non-publication order with respect to names, addresses and school of the students referred to in the disciplinary matter. The QCT further submits that it would be appropriate to order non-publication of ATL’s name if the Tribunal considers the publication of his name may lead to the identification of the students.
- [14]I am satisfied that it would be contrary to the public interest for information to be published which would identify ATL, any of the relevant students or former students, or the relevant school. This non-publication order can be revisited in any subsequent disciplinary proceedings.
- [15]I make orders pursuant to s 66 of the QCAT Act prohibiting the publication of that information.
Footnotes
[1]The Act, s 50(3)(c). The ‘review’ is conducted in the original jurisdiction of the Tribunal: see s 53(2) of the Act.
[2]QCT’s Submissions filed 28 August 2018.
[3](1988) 166 CLR 69.
[4][2017] QCAT 48 (citations omitted).
[5]See also s 55(1)(b) of the Act.
[6]Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 66(3).