Queensland College of Teachers v TWF
[2024] QCAT 447
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 TWF[2024] QCAT 447
- Add to List
Queensland College of Teachers v TWF[2024] QCAT 447
Queensland College of Teachers v TWF[2024] QCAT 447
QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CITATION: | Queensland College of Teachers v TWF [2024] QCAT 447 |
PARTIES: | Queensland College of teachers (applicant) v TWF (respondent) |
APPLICATION NO/S: | OCR002-24 |
MATTER TYPE: | Occupational regulation matters |
DELIVERED ON: | 16 October 2024 |
HEARING DATE: | On the Papers |
HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
DECISION OF: | Member Paratz AM Member Arthur Member Robyn Oliver |
ORDERS: |
|
CATCHWORDS: | EDUCATION – EDUCATORS – REGISTRATION – TRAINING AND REGISTRATION OF TEACHERS – where teacher engaged in inappropriate conduct with a former student and provided erroneous information to school administration, investigators appointed by the school, and the Queensland College of Teachers’ investigators – where delay occurred in advancing the disciplinary proceedings – whether the registration of the teacher should be cancelled, or the suspension be ended ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – whether non--publication order should be made – where order necessary in the interests of protecting the physical or mental health of the former student and the teacher, and where publication would be contrary to the public interest. Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld), s 92(1)(h), s 97, s 160(2)(b) Queensland College of Teachers v Teacher LQN [2023] QCAT 410 |
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]TWF (the teacher) was registered to teach in Queensland. Her registration to teach was suspended on 25 August 2021 by the Queensland College of Teachers (the College).
- [2]The College believed that there were grounds for disciplinary action against the teacher, and the matter was referred to the Tribunal on 2 January 2024, under Section 97 of the Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld) (the Act).
- [3]The Tribunal gave directions on 21 February 2024 for the matter to be heard and determined by a panel of the Tribunal on the papers, after the filing of material by the parties, having regard to the written material and submissions filed, and without an oral hearing.
Timeline
- [4]TWF was registered as a teacher on 30 November 2017.[1]
- [5]She commenced as a teacher in an academic subject at the relevant secondary school in South-East Queensland on 16 January 2018.[2]
- [6]The school received information on 27 June 2019 in relation to the teacher having had inappropriate dealings with students on the night of Friday 21 June 2019, and an investigation was conducted by the school.
- [7]The initial investigation found that no evidence could verify the initial information provided, and the teacher was advised on 17 July 2019 that the allegations were not substantiated.[3]
- [8]Further information was subsequently provided to the school, and the teacher was stood down on 21 February 2020 from any duties associated with her teaching and coaching roles at the school. The teacher resigned from her position on 3 April 2020.[4]
- [9]The College authorised an investigation into the allegations on 19 March 2020. The College’s investigation report was completed on 20 July 2021.[5]
- [10]The College suspended the teacher’s registration on 25 August 2021, under section 49 of the Act.[6]
- [11]The College’s investigation report was referred to the Professional Capacity and Teacher Conduct Committee on 18 November 2021.[7]
- [12]The Tribunal ordered the continuation of the suspension on 5 October 2021.[8]
The allegations
- [13]The allegations against TWF as to inappropriate dealings with former students were that:[9]
- On the evening of 21 June 2019 the teacher attended a night-club together with her friend and teacher colleague LQN.
- Whilst at the night-club the teacher socialised with former students (specifically former male student ‘A’ who had graduated in November 2018) which included dancing within close proximity and grinding.
- The teacher, LQN, and a male former student ‘B’, left the nightclub and shared a taxi together to the teacher’s residence.
- The teacher allowed LQN and the male former student ‘B’ to spend the night at her residence.
- [14]The allegations as to providing erroneous information by TWF related to information provided by the teacher between 28 June 2019 and 26 February 2020 in relation to inquiries conducted by the school administration, investigators appointed by the school, and by investigators appointed by the College.
- [15]Allegations as to inappropriate conduct were also made against LQN in relation to the events of 21 June 2019 and other subsequent conduct of LQN, and these resulted in disciplinary proceedings coming before the Tribunal. As a result of those proceedings, an order was made by the Tribunal to cancel the registration of LQN and to prohibit her from re-applying for registration or permission to teach under section 160(2)(d) and (j) of the Act for a period of 3 years and 2 months from 3 September 2020.[10]
Admissions of the teacher
- [16]The teacher, through her solicitors, filed submissions in Response in the Tribunal on 14 February 2024.
- [17]In her Response, the teacher made admissions that she had engaged in inappropriate conduct with former students and had provided erroneous information to the school, its investigators, and to the College and its investigators.
- [18]The father of former student ‘B’ advised the Senior Investigator of the Professional Conduct Unit of the College on 17 February 2020 that he did not wish his son to participate any further with the investigation in relation to LQN, having regard to the former student’s well-being.
- [19]Former student ‘B’ did not participate in the inquiries in relation to teacher TWF.
- [20]In light of the admissions of the teacher, and in the interests of the well-being of the teacher and the former students, we do not consider that it is necessary to discuss the details of the allegations.
Professional practice program
- [21]The teacher completed a program of education titled ‘Professional Practice and Professional Boundaries for Teachers’, which was conducted by Morrison Consulting and Advisory, on 7 March 2024. The facilitator for the video conference sessions was Mr A McPhee.
- [22]A report by the consultant notes that this was a customised learning program developed for the teacher which covered the core concepts relevant to professional practice and personal boundaries.[11]
- [23]The report provided impressions by the facilitator as to the teacher’s engagement in, and response to the course, as follows:[12]
(The teacher) engaged fully throughout the session and was able to openly and critically reflect upon the incident that gave rise to the complaint. She shared her story regarding allegations and reason for wanting to complete the course.
(The teacher) was able to reflect on her behaviour and identified the slippery slope behaviours that lead to the incident.
The facilitator and (the teacher) discussed at length the difference between expectations of the employer, professionalism and personal values. This dialogue helped to open up and expand (the teacher’s) understanding of her behaviour.
The facilitator and (the teacher) discussed multiple times and at length, the responsibilities of the teacher in setting clear boundaries with students and discussed ways to set them in the classroom. This included accessing resources including ‘Classroom Vibe’ by Dr Tim O'Leary and ‘The 10 Essential Skills’.
(The teacher) elaborated on the relationship she shared with the other teacher involved and her time as a beginning teacher. She was able to reflect on the experience and identify where she breached professional boundaries by responding personally rather than professionally. (The teacher) stated that she has learned from this. In moving to a new school context soon after the incident, she was able to enact what she said about professionalism and friendships in the workplace. (The teacher) was able to clearly explain how she has reflected upon the experience and how she would manage her rapport with colleagues in the future.
During the first presentation (the teacher) was able to articulate, with clarity and in great detail, the three stages of the APST and expectations the public has of all teachers. She provided examples at each stage from her own practice. The presentation was thorough, and responses were detailed.
(The teacher) was able to articulate the role and purpose of QCT. She clearly understood its role in protecting the interests of the public and setting standards for the profession.
The facilitator and (the teacher) discussed communications via Social Media (Messenger/Snapchat) and that school sanctioned applications should be the only platforms used by the teacher to communicate with students.
Values, morals, ethics and the law were explored in detail and how our personal values influence behaviours was discussed at length.
The teacher-student power imbalance was examined several times throughout the session. (The teacher) was able to communicate her responsibility in establishing and maintaining healthy teacher-student relationships. The importance of setting these boundaries and clearly communicating them was discussed at length, with examples and scenarios being explored.
Throughout the session, (the teacher) acknowledged and took responsibility for her actions; listened, shared and reflected on her collegial behaviour.
(The teacher) sought on multiple occasions more information on action she could take in the future to prevent being in such circumstances with regards to reporting the behaviour of colleagues.
Mandatory reporting was discussed along with who to speak to and managing up if you aren’t satisfied that a complaint has been responded to.
(The teacher) acknowledged that the friendship she shared with the other teacher clouded her professional judgement. She commented that her behaviour was informed by her personal values of being a friend rather than the professionalism expected of a teacher.
(The teacher) was receptive and open to the feedback and resources offered by the facilitator. She identified the following key learning from the program and session discussions:
- When reflecting on one’s behaviour and motivation, always come back to asking whose needs are being met by my actions/inactions?
- When colleagues are friends, the professional relationship is pre--eminent.
- Her passion for teaching and her desire to have her registration re—instated so she can continue to teach again.
The application of these key learnings will now be a matter for (the teacher) to incorporate into her teaching practice.
Submissions of the College
- [24]The College filed submissions on grounds, sanction and non-publication orders on 22 March 2024.
- [25]The College noted that it is unaware of any previous decisions with similar facts as the current matter, particularly as it relates to ground two, misleading QCT investigators.[13]
- [26]It referred to the related tribunal decision in relation to LQN, and noted similarities with this matter, including the age and experience of the teachers.
- [27]It noted that the circumstances in LQN involved that teacher having personal dealings of an intimate nature with a recently graduated former year 12 student, which are not present in this matter. It submitted that this matter was nevertheless more serious having regard to misleading investigators, as follows:[14]
- 25.Notwithstanding teacher LQN’s serious conduct regarding sexual intimacy, the applicant submits the present case is more serious due to the repeated misleading statements made to QCT investigators. These statements had the potential to undermine the investigation into teacher LQN’s conduct and demonstrated a lack of insight and remorse into her behaviour.
- [28]The College accepted that the teacher has taken steps to address her behaviour, which is to her credit, and specifically noted her co-operative participation in the proceedings as follows:[15]
- 26.The applicant accepts that the respondent has taken steps to address her behaviour, which is to her credit. Specifically, she has actively participated in the proceedings and consented to orders reducing the costs of proceedings, such as foregoing the compulsory conference, having the matter heard and determined on the papers, and agreeing, at an early stage, the allegations as particularised in the referral. In addition, she has completed a professional boundaries course, which focussed on professional boundaries and professional practice.
- [29]As to the risk of recurrence, having regard to the report, the College conceded that the teacher is at low risk of repeating the behaviour.[16]
- [30]The College noted that while TWF had been a teacher for a relatively short period of time, she was 26 years of age at the time of the conduct, which was 8 years older than the former students.[17] (Other material indicates that the teacher was just under 8 years older.)
- [31]The College submitted that an appropriate sanction in this matter would be to find that a ground for disciplinary action was established, and to make an order pursuant to sections 160(2)(d) and 160(2)(j) to cancel the teacher’s registration and to prohibit the teacher from reapplying for registration or permission to teach for a period of 3 years from the date of suspension.[18]
Submissions of the Teacher
- [32]The submissions of the teacher noted that the teacher accepted that grounds for disciplinary action pursuant to section 92(1)(h) of the Act are established on the material before the Tribunal.
- [33]The teacher submitted that an issue of undue delay by the College arose as to the period between 5 October 2021 when the Tribunal continued the suspension of the teacher’s registration, and 2 January 2024 when the College filed the disciplinary referral, which it described as a delay of approximately 2 years.[19]
- [34]The submissions noted that reasonable temporal allowances should be made for the College’s professional conduct unit to complete and refer an investigation to the decision-maker; for the matter to be directed to the College’s legal unit; for the Tribunal to decide whether to continue the suspension; and for the Tribunal’s Christmas/New Year closure from 25 December 2023 to 1 January 2024.[20]
- [35]The teacher submitted that the Tribunal should extend a degree of leniency when imposing sanction due to the delay of the College which was unfair.[21]
- [36]It was submitted that the Tribunal should consider when imposing sanction that the teacher’s acceptance of disciplinary grounds avoided the necessity for a hearing, and that the teacher had assisted with the efficient administration of justice.[22]
- [37]It was noted that the teacher had successfully completed the Professional Practice and Professional Boundaries for Teachers program on her own volition and personal expense, which demonstrates rehabilitation and insight.[23]
- [38]It was submitted that the material shows that the teacher had taken positive action to address her conduct that gave rise to the relevant event, and had not been the subject of any similar post-event conduct.[24]
- [39]The submissions compared the situation in LQN where the teacher’s registration was cancelled and there was a prohibition of 3 years and 2 months. It noted that LQN had engaged in inappropriate and intimate behaviour with a former student, and provided false information to her employer during the investigation.[25]
- [40]It was submitted that both the teacher and LQN were dishonest, but that the two occasions of the teacher’s dishonesty, when considered in comparative totality to LQN’s conduct, was lower on the scale, and that the sanction imposed by the Tribunal should reflect the factual distinction between this teacher and LQN.[26]
- [41]It was submitted that cancellation of the teacher’s registration with a prohibition as submitted by the College should not be within the permissible range of sanctions, when all circumstances are considered,[27] and that an appropriate sanction would be to end the suspension pursuant to section 160(2)(b) of the Act.[28]
Legislation
- [42]Section 92(1)(h) of the Act provides as follows:
92 Grounds for disciplinary action
- Each of the following is a ground for disciplinary action against a relevant teacher—
- the person behaves in a way, whether connected with the teaching profession or otherwise, that does not satisfy the standard of behaviour generally expected of a teacher;
- [43]Section 97 of the Act provides as follows:
97 Requirement for College to start practice and conduct proceedings
- If the College reasonably believes, other than on the basis of interstate information, that 1 or more grounds for disciplinary action against a relevant teacher exist, the College must refer the matter to the practice and conduct body stated in subsection (2).
- The practice and conduct body to which the matter must be referred is—
- for a general matter—QCAT; or
- for a PC&TC matter—the PC&TC committee.
- However, subsection (1) does not apply to a matter in relation to which the College and the relevant teacher have entered into a practice and conduct agreement.
- If a matter is referred to QCAT—
- the College must inform QCAT about the grounds for the practice and conduct matter and the facts and circumstances forming the basis for the grounds; and
- QCAT must conduct a hearing and make decisions about the practice and conduct matter referred to QCAT having regard to the information provided by the College.
- [44]Section 160 of the Act provides as follows:-
160 Decision about disciplinary action against approved teacher
- This section applies if the relevant teacher is an approved teacher.
- If QCAT decides a ground for disciplinary action against the relevant teacher has been established, QCAT may do 1 or more of the following—
- decide to take no further action in relation to the matter;
- if the teacher’s registration or permission to teach is suspended under section 48 or 49 - end the suspension;
- issue a warning or reprimand to the teacher;
- cancel the teacher’s registration or permission to teach;
- suspend the teacher’s registration or permission to teach for a stated time;
- make an order requiring the teacher to pay to the College, by way of costs, an amount QCAT considers appropriate having regard to—
- any expenses incurred by the College in investigating the matter; and
- the expenses incurred by the College in the proceedings before QCAT;
- make an order requiring the teacher to pay to the College, by way of penalty, an amount fixed by QCAT but not more than the equivalent of 20 penalty units;
- impose conditions on, or amend or remove conditions on, the teacher’s registration or permission to teach;
- make an order that a particular notation or endorsement about the teacher be entered in the register;
- if QCAT cancels the teacher’s registration or permission to teach—make an order prohibiting the teacher from reapplying for registration or permission to teach for a stated period from the day the order is made or indefinitely;
Note—
See also section 350 (Decision about disciplinary action against approved teacher).
- make another order QCAT considers appropriate;
- accept an undertaking from the teacher.
Discussion
- [45]The teacher has admitted to having inappropriate dealings with former students in relation to the evening at a night-club on 21 June 2019 where she socialised by dancing closely with them, and to events later that night where she allowed a former student and her friend LQN (who was also a teacher at the same school) to share a taxi to her residence and spend the night there.
- [46]She has also admitted to giving false information to the school administration, investigators appointed by the school, and investigators appointed by the College in relation to the events of 21 June 2019, and in relation to other matters involving LQN.
- [47]Disciplinary proceedings were conducted in relation to LQN in relation to the events of 21 June 2019 and further matters involving inappropriate contact with a former student, including intimate contact. On 4 October 2023 the Tribunal ordered that LQN’s registration as a teacher be cancelled, and that she be prohibited from re-applying for registration or permission to teach for a period of 3 years and 2 months from 3 September 2020.
Disciplinary grounds
- [48]Section 92(1)(h) provides that it is a ground for disciplinary action against a relevant teacher if the person behaves in a way that does not satisfy the standard of behaviour generally expected of a teacher.
- [49]It is well established that contact between a teacher and a former student may be inappropriate due to a power imbalance between teachers and students, which can continue even after the student leaves school, as expressed by the Tribunal in Queensland College of Teachers v PPK.[29]
- 14.In our view there is a difference in power and authority between a teacher and student and generally a high level of trust placed by the student and their family in the teacher. There is also an expectation by the student and their family that the teacher will behave in a way generally expected of a teacher. This trust and expectation exists not only where the student is an immediate pupil of the teacher but more generally (even where the immediate relationship does not exist) by reason of the fact that the person holds the position of teacher. We are also of the view that the differences in power and authority which exist create an imbalance between the teacher and student which can continue even after the teacher or student leaves the school. The imbalance can last for some time and is not generally something that can be immediately extinguished at a particular point in time. These imbalances reduce the quality and relevance of the student’s consent to be involved in the relationship and to what degree.
- [50]In this matter, the female teacher engaged in close personal contact with male former students from the former year 12 cohort of the school at which she taught, about six months after they left school.
- [51]The material indicates that at least some of the students on the evening addressed her as ‘Miss’, which indicates that they still viewed her in the context of a teacher - student relationship at that time.
- [52]The teacher then displayed poor judgement by allowing a former student to travel to her residence together with LQN, and spend the night there. Those actions treated the former student as being on an equal social level of experience as she and her fellow teacher who were about eight years older than the former student.
- [53]When the teacher was questioned by the school authorities as to the events of the evening at the nightclub and subsequently; and as to other matters involving LQN, she gave false answers.
- [54]The teacher has made admissions that she engaged in conduct with former students and provided erroneous information, as alleged.
- [55]The actions of the teacher in behaving in these ways do not satisfy the standards of behaviour generally expected of a teacher.
- [56]We are satisfied that the conduct of the teacher constitutes disciplinary grounds under Section 92(1)(h) of the Act, which are established, and order accordingly.
Sanction
- [57]The teacher was suspended by the College on 25 August 2021.
- [58]There has been a significant period of time that has passed in this matter:
- the events as to the evening occurred on 21 June 2019
- the giving of false information occurred between 28 June 2019 and 26 February 2020
- the teacher was suspended on 25 August 2021
- the referral to the Tribunal was filed on 2 January 2024
- the matter was directed to be heard on the papers after the filing of submissions, after 22 April 2024.
- [59]The College submitted that the teacher’s conduct is more serious than that of LQN. That is a curious submission by the College, as it submitted that the order in this matter should be that the teacher’s registration be cancelled and the teacher be prohibited from reapplying for registration or permission to teach for a period of 3 years from the date of suspension.
- [60]The period of prohibition from re-applying for LQN was determined by the Tribunal as 3 years and 2 months, so the College is in fact seeking an order that is less severe than that in LQN, which is at odds with its submission that the conduct of this teacher was more serious.
- [61]The teacher completed a course in professional practice and boundaries. The report of the consultant relates that the teacher elaborated on the relationship she shared with the other teacher involved and that the teacher was able to reflect on the experience and identify where she breached professional boundaries by responding personally rather than professionally.
- [62]The report of the consultant relates that the teacher acknowledged that the friendship she shared with the other teacher clouded her professional judgement, and that her behaviour was informed by her personal values of being a friend rather than the professionalism expected of a teacher.
- [63]The report of the consultant relates that the teacher has insight into the cause of her behaviour and acknowledged and took responsibility for her actions.
- [64]We accept that the underlying motivation, and error, by the teacher, who was relatively inexperienced at the time, was that she allowed her personal and friendship values to overshadow her professional responsibilities as a teacher, and that she acknowledges and understands that error.
- [65]The College accepts that the teacher is at low risk of repeating the behaviour.
- [66]The report of the consultant notes that the teacher voiced her passion for teaching and her desire to have her registration re-instated so she can continue to teach again.
- [67]The material suggests that LQN was the primary instigator of the decision to attend the nightclub, and of the decision for LQN, the teacher and the student, to share a taxi to the teacher’s residence. This is indicated by the recounting of an argument between the teacher and LQN before entering the taxi– whilst the details of that argument have not been provided, there is a clear inference from the circumstances of the evening that LQN was wanting to pursue that course.
- [68]At the time of the nightclub event, LQN had approximately 5 years teaching experience, compared with 1.5 years for TWF.
- [69]We note the concerns of the College as to the adverse effect of the false information given by the teacher upon the early investigation of the events concerning her and LQN, and the impeding of the disciplinary investigation in relation to the broader actions of LQN.
- [70]Overall, whilst acknowledging those concerns as to the effect upon the disciplinary processes, we consider that the seriousness of the teacher’s behaviour is less than that of LQN.
- [71]The Act provides, amongst other sanctions, two alternative sanctions under section 160(2) – either ending the suspension under 160(2)(b); or cancelling the teacher’s registration and making an order prohibiting the teacher from reapplying for registration or permission to teach for a stated period from the day the order is made or indefinitely under section 160(2)(j).
- [72]The College has submitted that the teacher’s registration should be cancelled, and a period of prohibition against reapplying for registration or permission to teach should apply. The submissions for the teacher are that an appropriate sanction would be to end the suspension.
- [73]The teacher’s registration was from 30 November 2017 to 30 November 2022. The end date of that registration has passed whilst these proceedings have been on foot.
- [74]We note the significant time that has been taken in processing this matter, and consider that this should be taken into account in determining the sanction.
- [75]Having regard to the report of the consultant, the submissions of the College, and the lengthy period of time that has passed, we consider that there should be minimal impediment to the teacher seeking to recommence her career as she wishes, and that there is no need for any further psychological or other reports to be obtained before she applies for registration in the usual way.
- [76]We consider that the appropriate decision is that the teacher’s suspension be ended under section 160(2)(b), rather than being cancelled, and order accordingly.
Non-publication order
- [77]Section 66 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (‘the QCAT Act’) provides that the Tribunal may make an order prohibiting publication of documents, evidence and information, if the Tribunal considers the order is necessary under section 66(2)(b) to avoid endangering the physical or mental health or safety of a person; or under section 66(2)(d) to avoid the publication of confidential information or information whose publication would be contrary to the public interest.
- [78]The Tribunal made an interim non-publication order on 11 January 2024 as follows:
Other than to the parties to this proceeding and until further order of the Tribunal, publication is prohibited of any information that that may identify (the teacher), any relevant student or former student, any other relevant teacher, or any relevant school, other than to the extent necessary to enable the College to meet its statutory obligations, particularly under sections 285, 285AA, 285B and 287 of the Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld).
- [79]The teacher in her submissions sought an ongoing non-publication order as follows:[30]
Other than to the parties of this proceeding and until further order of the Tribunal, publication is prohibited of any information that may identify the Respondent, former student or the relevant school other than to the extent necessary for the Applicant to meet its statutory obligations as provided under the education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld). The parties may provide a copy of this decision to any regulatory authority or employer in compliance with disclosure requirements.
- [80]The teacher submitted that publication would cause more than mere embarrassment to the former student and the teacher; that permitting publication increases the risk of harm to them; and that consequently it is necessary to avoid endangering the physical or mental health or safety of those persons in the circumstances; and that it is not in the public interest to permit publication.[31]
- [81]The College submitted that non-publication orders are ‘necessary’, as required by section 66(2) of the QCAT Act as follows:[32]
- 36.The applicant submits that as this matter is directly related to the respondent’s conduct as a teacher and concerns a former student, it would not be in the interests of justice for any student, child, or school to be identified. As the order is sought for the benefit of the student, they should not be precluded from seeking a variation to the order in the event that they wish to speak about their experiences.
- [82]The College submitted that an order in similar wording to that proposed by the teacher is appropriate, as follows:[33]
Other than to the parties to this proceeding and the legal representatives, and until further order of the tribunal, publication is prohibited of any information that may identify a student or former student, or a school, other than to the extent necessary for the Queensland College of Teachers to meet its statutory obligations and as provided for under the Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (QLD). The respondent may provide a copy of this decision and the reasons to any regulatory authority or employer in compliance with any disclosure requirements.
- [83]We accept the submissions of the parties that it is appropriate that an ongoing non-publication order be made.
- [84]The varying wordings that have been proposed are essentially to the same effect. Having regard to the role, and experience of the College, we will adopt the wording submitted by the College, varying it only to allow both parties to provide a copy of this decision and the reasons to any regulatory authority or employer in compliance with disclosure requirements, and order accordingly.
Footnotes
[1] Letter from the school to the College, 5 March 2020.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Application or referral – disciplinary proceeding, part C [13].
[6] Ibid [15].
[7] Ibid [13].
[8] Ibid [16].
[9] Application or referral – disciplinary proceeding, part C.
[10] Queensland College of Teachers v Teacher LQN [2023] QCAT 410.
[11] Report of Morrison Consulting and Advisory, [4].
[12] Ibid [6].
[13] Queensland College of Teachers submissions on ground, sanction and nonpublication orders, 22 March 2024, [22].
[14] Ibid [25].
[15] Ibid [26].
[16] Ibid [28(a)].
[17] Ibid [28(d)].
[18] Ibid [31].
[19] Ibid [20]-[21].
[20] Ibid [17].
[21] Ibid [32].
[22] Ibid [33]-[35].
[23] Ibid [36].
[24] Ibid [37].
[25] Ibid [40]-[41].
[26] Ibid [42]-[44].
[27] Ibid [45].
[28] Ibid [47(a)].
[29] [2019] QCAT 59, [14].
[30] Ibid [48].
[31] Ibid [52]-[59].
[32] Queensland College of Teachers submissions on grounds, sanction and nonpublication orders, 22 March 2024, [36].
[33] Ibid [38].