Queensland College of Teachers v OKG
[2025] QCAT 341
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 OKG[2025] QCAT 341
- Add to List
Queensland College of Teachers v OKG[2025] QCAT 341
Queensland College of Teachers v OKG[2025] QCAT 341
QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CITATION: | Queensland College of Teachers v OKG [2025] QCAT 341 |
PARTIES: | queensland college of teachers (applicant) v okg (respondent) |
APPLICATION NO/S: | OCR058-24 |
MATTER TYPE: | Occupational regulation matters |
DELIVERED ON: | 5 September 2025 |
HEARING DATE: | 28 August 2025 |
HEARD AT: | Brisbane |
DECISION OF: | Member Lee Benjamin (Presiding) Member H Katter Member R English |
ORDERS: |
|
CATCHWORDS: | EDUCATION – EDUCATORS – REGISTRATION – TRAINING AND REGISTRATION OF TEACHERS – where teacher charged with serious offences but all charges struck out/withdrawn – whether suspension of teacher registration should be ended Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 66 Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld), s 48, s 92 Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld), s15 Queensland College of Teachers v Armstrong [2010] QCAT 709 |
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
What is this case about?
- [1]The Respondent, a teacher, was charged with ‘serious offences’ as defined in s 15 of the Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld).
- [2]Consequently, as required by s 48 of the Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld) (QCT Act), the Applicant, the Queensland College of Teachers (QCT), suspended the Respondent’s teacher registration and referred the suspension to the Tribunal for review.
- [3]All charges were subsequently struck out/withdrawn by the Magistrates Court of Victoria.
- [4]Having regard to the evidence as to the circumstances surrounding the charges, the parties contend, and we agree, that there are no grounds for disciplinary action against the Respondent. The suspension of Respondent’s teacher registration therefore must be ended. A non-publication order was previously issued by the Tribunal for this application. It remains in place.
- [5]Our reasons follow.
No ground for disciplinary action
- [6]The potential ground for disciplinary action that arises for consideration is found in s 92(1)(h) of the QCT Act. It applies where a teacher ‘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’.
- [7]Whether this ground is established requires consideration of community and professional expectations and standards. The welfare and best interests of children are the primary considerations.1
- [8]The circumstances leading to the charges in this case are known only to the Respondent and the complainant; they occurred in private.
- [9]We have reviewed the materials filed in this application, including, among other things, an affidavit sworn by the Principal Legal Officer of the QCT, annexing a National Police Check Results Report and extracts of Magistrates Court of Victoria Verdict and Judgment Records. The materials reveal that the Director of Public Prosecutions in Victoria did not proceed with the matter. All charges were otherwise struck out/withdrawn.
- [10]We are mindful that our consideration should not be limited to whether the charges were withdrawn in the criminal justice system. We must have regard to the circumstances of the alleged conduct.
- [11]For there to be a ground for disciplinary action, we must be satisfied that conduct warranting a conclusion that the Respondent behaved in a way that does not satisfy the standard of behaviour generally expected of a teacher occurred. The parties’ submissions in this regard are of a similar tenor: without evidence in chief being given and cross-examination being conducted, the complainant’s credibility and the reliability of the evidence cannot be determined. The Tribunal should not be persuaded on the balance of probability that the allegations contained within the charges have been made out.
- [12]Considering the foregoing factors, we are not satisfied the alleged conduct, or other conduct relating to the allegations, occurred. Accordingly, we find that there is nothing to warrant a conclusion that the Respondent behaved in a way that would satisfy any ground for disciplinary action. No ground for disciplinary action is otherwise established.
A non-publication order issued in the interests of justice
- [13]On 25 March 2024, the Tribunal made a non-publication order under s 66 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) in relation to this matter. This order remains in place.