Teacher MYK v Queensland College of Teachers
[2023] QCAT 114
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
- Teacher MYK v Queensland College of Teachers[2023] QCAT 114
- Add to List
Teacher MYK v Queensland College of Teachers[2023] QCAT 114
Teacher MYK v Queensland College of Teachers[2023] QCAT 114
QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CITATION: | Teacher MYK v Queensland College of Teachers [2023] QCAT 114 |
PARTIES: | teacher MYK (applicant) v queensland college of teachers (respondent) |
APPLICATION NO/S: | OCR221-22 |
MATTER TYPE: | Occupational regulation matters |
DELIVERED ON: | 28 March 2023 |
HEARING DATE: | On the papers |
HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
DECISION OF: | Senior Member Browne |
ORDERS: |
|
CATCHWORDS: | EDUCATION – EDUCATORS – REGISTRATION – where teacher registration is suspended – where a review of suspension is sought on the basis that the teacher does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children – whether teacher does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children – whether the suspension of teacher registration should be continued or ended – whether a non-publication order is necessary Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld), s 55(6) Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 10, s 32, s 66 Queensland College of Teachers v Teacher CXJ [2017] QCAT 83 |
APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION: | 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]On 10 November 2021, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Teacher MYK does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children and continued the suspension of her teacher registration.
- [2]Teacher MYK now applies for a review of the Tribunal’s decision to continue the suspension on the basis that she no longer poses an unacceptable risk of harm to children and the suspension of her teacher registration should be ended.[1]
- [3]The Tribunal is now required to exercise its original jurisdiction to decide the appropriateness or otherwise of the Tribunal’s decision to continue the suspension.[2] The onus is on Teacher MYK to satisfy me that she does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children and the suspension should be ended.[3]
- [4]Teacher MYK submits that she is no longer an unacceptable risk of harm to children referring to earlier child safety intervention in the form of a Parental Agreement having ceased on 11 April 2022. Teacher MYK also refers to the dismissal of criminal proceedings on 30 June 2022, such proceedings having been resolved after Teacher MYK participated in Justice Mediation and completed the Triple P Parenting Program in addition to other programs.[4]
- [5]Queensland College of Teachers (the College) agrees that Teacher MYK no longer poses an unacceptable risk of harm to children and it would be appropriate in all of the circumstances of this matter for the Tribunal to end the suspension of Teacher MYK’s registration.[5]
- [6]The Tribunal is satisfied that Teacher MYK and the College have filed written submissions and supporting material in relation to the review of the suspension decision.[6]
- [7]The issue to be determined now is whether the Tribunal is satisfied that Teacher MYK does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children.[7]
Tribunal’s findings
- [8]Teacher MYK’s teacher registration was suspended after she was charged with ‘assaults occasioning bodily harm’ in relation to physical injuries sustained by her infant child.[8]
- [9]It is uncontroversial that the charge was dismissed after Teacher MYK completed Adult Restorative Justice Conferencing. Further to that and relevant to whether Teacher MYK does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children, Teacher MYK cooperated with the Department of Children, Youth Justice and Multicultural Affairs (the Department) in relation to an intervention. The Department became involved after it received ‘worries’ in relation to Teacher MYK’s son which resulted in an investigation and assessment and subsequently an intervention with Parental Agreement.[9] The Department’s underlying concerns resulting in an intervention relate to Teacher MYK’s son experiencing physical harm after suffering a spiral fracture to his humerus which is said to be unexplained from a medical perspective.[10]
- [10]It is clear from the Department’s letter to Teacher MYK filed in support of the application for review that following a case review conducted on 21 March 2022, the Department determined that Teacher MYK’s son is no longer at an unacceptable risk of suffering physical harm and that all case plan goals have been met by both parents.[11] The Department states that the relevant child is assessed as being safe in Teacher MYK’s primary care and that both parents have been assessed as parents both ‘willing and able to care and protect [the relevant child]’.[12] As reported in the Department’s letter, the intervention with parental consent has been closed due to the risk of ‘significant harm being mitigated’ and the parents of the relevant child’s ‘willingness to access support from community agencies when required’.[13]
- [11]Teacher MYK has provided relevant material in support of her submission that she no longer poses an unacceptable risk of harm to children. It is open for me to find on the evidence that Teacher MYK has taken responsibility for her actions and has been held accountable for the harm caused to her infant child.
- [12]I am satisfied that Teacher MYK’s explanation for the incident filed in support of the present application for review is consistent with her evidence given to police following an investigation. Teacher MYK told police that her infant son is ‘an aggressive feeder’ referring to his hands and arms always moving around and that he was wearing a suit when she was breastfeeding.[14] Teacher MYK told police that her infant child’s fist came up into her face and then she had ‘an instant reaction’ and moved her son’s hand away and then she ‘heard a noise’.[15]
- [13]Teacher MYK has accepted responsibility for her actions having participated in restorative justice and as evident from the outcome of the conference, Teacher MYK has expressed remorse for what happened and spoken about her hopes for her infant son and what she can do to ensure she is being the best she can be to help her son reach those hopes and dreams.[16]
- [14]I accept Teacher MYK’s evidence that she has cooperated with the Department including completing the Circle of Security Program. I accept, as submitted, that Teacher MYK has participated in Justice Mediation and following submissions made in respect of the criminal proceedings, such proceedings were resolved or discontinued.
- [15]I am satisfied that Teacher MYK does not pose an unacceptable risk of harm to children and that it is appropriate in this matter to end the suspension of her teacher registration. I order accordingly.
Non-publication order
- [16]It is necessary in this matter to make a non-publication order.[17] I am satisfied that it is not in the public interest to allow publication of information that would allow Teacher MYK, her infant son or relevant third persons to be identified, other than necessary to enable the College to perform its functions. I make an order accordingly.
Footnotes
[1]Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld), s 55(6).
[2]See s 10 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) and Queensland College of Teachers v Teacher CXJ [2017] QCAT 83.
[3]Ibid.
[4]Application for review filed 29 August 2022.
[5]Respondent’s submissions in response filed on 7 October 2022.
[6]Tribunal’s Directions dated 14 October 2022. The time for filing the application for review was extended by the Tribunal, without objection by the College, on 14 October 2022.
[7]Matter listed for a decision on the papers on 23 March 2022.
[8]See applicant’s material filed on 29 August 2022 and respondent’s submissions in response filed on 7 October 2022, p 7.
[9]See the applicant’s material filed on 29 August 2022, the respondent’s submissions in response filed on 7 October 2022, p 7 and see the Department’s letter dated 11 April 2022.
[10]See the applicant’s material filed 29 August 2022 and the Department’s letter dated 11 April 2022.
[11]Ibid.
[12]Ibid.
[13]Ibid.
[14]Applicant’s material filed 29 August 2022, see exhibit “TF1”, transcript of interview, p 18.
[15]Ibid.
[16]Ibid, Exhibit “RB3”, restorative justice outcome dated 27 April 2022.
[17]Pursuant to s 66 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld).