Murray v Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney General

[2018] QCAT 75

CITATION:

Murray v Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney General [2018] QCAT 75

PARTIES:

Trent Ashton Murray
(Applicant)

v

Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney General

(Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

CML047-18

MATTER TYPE:

Other civil dispute matters

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Gardiner

DELIVERED ON:

21 March 2018

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1.   The Application for leave to be represented filed 8 February 2018 is refused.

CATCHWORDS:

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS – PARTIES AND REPRESENTATION – where representation by mother sought by applicant – where mother not legally qualified or experienced in matters before tribunal – whether representation should be allowed

Queensland Civil and Administrative Act 2009 (Qld), s 3, s 29, s 43, s 91
Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000 (Qld)

Morton v Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2017] QCAT 255

APPEARANCES:

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act).

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. Trent Murray has applied for leave to be represented at all future proceedings in his application to QCAT to be review the decision to him with a negative notice under the Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act 2000. The result of this negative notice is that he currently does not hold a Blue Card.

2. Mr Murray want his mother to represent him.  He says he needs her help as he had limited understanding of reading and writing and doesn’t understand a lot of the QCAT process.  Mr Murray wants his mother to accompany him to any QCAT event.

3. Mrs Murray is not legally qualified.  Section 43 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Act 2009 provides that parties represent themselves unless the interests of justice require otherwise. This section also says a person cannot be represented by a person who is not a legal practitioner unless the Tribunal is satisfied the person is appropriate to undertake that role. 

4. The Director-General submits that Mrs Murray may be a witness in the proceedings. As such, the Director-General submits Mrs Murray would not be appropriate person to represent her son. The Tribunal has recently said in another matter: [1]

   “It is not appropriate for a person who is a witness in the proceedings to also represent and advocate for the applicant in the proceedings.”

   [1]Morton v Director-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2017] QCAT 255 at [13].

5. The Director-General further submits that even if Mrs Murray was not a witness, there is no evidence to show that Mrs Murray has sufficient or any  experience in the blue card legislative system to be of assistance in the proceedings, such as to make it in the interests of justice for her to represent her son.[2]

   [2]Ibid at [14].

6. I am satisfied there is no evidence to support the conclusion that allowing  Mrs Murray to represent Mr Murray is in the interests of justice or that it  promotes  the objects of the Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening) Act. I am also not satisfied that it adds to ensuring proceedings will be conducted in a manner which is accessible, fair, just, economical, informal, quick and consistent as required by the objects of the QCAT Act.[3]

   [3]QCAT Act: s 3(b).

7. However, Mr Murray will not be disadvantaged by formal representation not being given to his mother.

8. Firstly, the Tribunal is required under section 29 of the QCAT Act to take reasonably steps to ensure that Mr Murray understands the Tribunal's practices and procedures, the nature of any assertions and their legal implications, and any decision of the Tribunal.

9. This Tribunal has long experience in fulfilling the requirements of section 29 as many applicants in Blue Card matters are unrepresented.

10. Secondly, the Director-General has told the Tribunal he has no objection to Mrs Murray sitting with Mr Murray as a support person after she has given any evidence in the proceedings.

11. The QCAT Act allows for this support under section 91 of the QCAT Act. This section says a support person is able to attend with an Applicant in person at a conference or hearing and is permitted to be a witness at the hearing. The support person cannot directly address the Tribunal but can assist the applicant.

12. This is a regular occurrence in many matters before this Tribunal.

13. For these reasons, Mr Murray’s application for leave to be represented is refused.