Black v Chief Executive, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation [2011] QCAT 466

CITATION: Black v Chief Executive, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation [2011] QCAT 466 PARTIES: Kirk Romel Black v Chief Executive, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation APPLICATION NUMBER: GAR390-10 MATTER TYPE: General administrative review matters HEARING DATE: On the papers HEARD AT: Brisbane DECISION OF: C Endicott, Senior Member DELIVERED ON: 5 October 2011 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane ORDERS MADE: Application for review of the decision dated 3 November 2010 is dismissed. CATCHWORDS: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW – suspension of security officer’s licence pending criminal charge – where criminal charge finalised – where licence subsequently cancelled – review application lacks substance – early end to proceedings Security Providers Act 1993, s 21(3) Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, s 47 APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any): The hearing took place on the papers in the absence of the parties in accordance with section 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009. REASONS FOR DECISION [1] One evening in July 2009 a Mr Kirk was enjoying a night out in Airlie Beach with his then fiancée and some friends. After consuming several -- 1 of 3 -- 2 alcoholic drinks, Mr Kirk went to a venue called Paddy’s Shenanigans to continue socialising with his friends. On leaving the venue, Mr Kirk had an exchange of words with the applicant, Mr Black who was a security guard at that venue. Mr Black then struck at Mr Kirk who fell and injured a finger on his right hand. As a consequence of his injury, Mr Kirk has lost approximately 20% movement in that finger. [2] In October 2010 Mr Black was charged with assault causing grievous bodily harm. When notified of the charge, the respondent asked Mr Black to show cause why a licence issued to him under the Security Providers Act 1993 should not be suspended. On 3 November 2010 a decision was made to suspend the licence until the end of the criminal proceedings. [3] On 25 August 2011 Mr Black pleaded guilty to the charge and on 1 September 2011 he was convicted of the offence and sentenced in the District Court by way of a fine of $2,500 in default of payment imprisonment for four months. The conviction was recorded. A criminal compensation order was made in the sum of $1,200. [4] Mr Black had sought a review in QCAT of the decision made on 3 November 2010 to suspend his security licence. The suspension was until the finalisation of the criminal proceedings. QCAT granted a stay of the effect of the suspension until the finalisation of the criminal charge. The criminal proceedings were finalised on 1 September 2011. The suspension of the licence ended on that date. Mr Black has informed QCAT that as a result of the conviction entered on 1 September 2011, his security licence had been automatically cancelled. [5] As the decision made on 3 November 2010 no longer had any effect, the tribunal made a direction on 6 September 2011 requiring Mr Black to file submissions as to why the review application should not be dismissed. Mr Black provided submissions in which he sought to continue with the review of the decision made on 3 November 2010. He did not indicate in his submissions any intention to appeal the outcome of the criminal proceedings. [6] Under section 20 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, the stated purpose of QCAT conducting a review is to produce the correct and preferable decision. QCAT conducts a merits review of the decision in question by way of a fresh hearing of the matter. There must necessarily be a matter to decide if a merits review is to be conducted by QCAT. [7] As from 1 September 2011 there was no longer any matter to decide as the suspension of the licence in question had ended. There was nothing about which QCAT could make any decision by way of merits review. The review application lacked any substance from 1 September 2011. [8] Section 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 gives QCAT power to bring a proceeding to an early end if the tribunal considers that an application is frivolous, vexatious or misconceived or is lacking in substance or is otherwise an abuse of process. [9] I am of the view that this application to review a decision made on 3 November 2010 and which no longer has any effect should be brought to -- 2 of 3 -- 3 an early end as it is misconceived and lacks substance as there is no outcome that can be delivered to Mr Black about that matter. Since 1 September 2011, QCAT has had no power to direct the respondent to return the security licence to Mr Black. That licence was cancelled by operation of law on 1 September 2011. [10] The only role that QCAT had before 1 September 2011 was to review the decision to suspend the licence pending the outcome of the criminal charge. Mr Black was actually successful in obtaining a stay of the suspension and nothing more favourable by way of outcome can now be delivered to him by QCAT in this review application. [11] Under section 47 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 the application must be dismissed. -- 3 of 3 --