Misunderstanding or Misdirection?: Whistleblower Protection in Queensland

In his report into corruption in Queensland, Fitzgerald listed whistleblower protection as a necessary part of a strong governance regime. "What is required is an accessible, independent body to which disclosures can be made, confidentially (at least in the first instance) and in any event free from fear of reprisals." It was one of the reforms studied by the Electoral and Administrative Review Committee, the report of which resulted in the Whistleblowers Protection Act 1994 (WPA). The need for whistleblower protection was supported by all sides of Parliament. The Premier, Wayne Goss, in his Second Reading Speech on the Public Sector Ethics Bill , said that that Act and the WPA would form a package with the former outlining required behaviour and the WPA encouraging staff to report wrongdoing. The WPA was subsequently passed and has remained virtually unamended for over a decade. Such consistency is either an indication of skilled drafting and effectiveness or the fact that the Act has been neglected. It is the hypothesis of this paper that the latter is the case. This hypothesis will be tested by examining the sincerity and diligence with which the Act has been treated during, and following, its passage.

Treating an unhealthy organisational culture : the implications of the Bundaberg Hospital inquiry for managerial ethical decision making

This paper explores the interplay between individual values, espoused organisational values and the values of the organisational culture in practice in light of a recent Royal Commission in Queensland, Australia, which highlighted systematic failures in patient care. The lack of congruence among values at these levels impacts upon the ethical decision making of health managers. The presence of institutional ethics regimes such as the Public Sector Ethics Act 1994 (Qld) and agency codes of conduct are not sufficient to counteract the negative influence of informal codes of practice that undermine espoused organisational values and community standards. The ethical decision-making capacity of health care managers remains at the front line in the battle against unethical and unprofessional practice. What is known about the topic? Value congruence theory focusses on the conflicts between individual and organisational values. Congruence between individual values, espoused values and values expressed in everyday practice can only be achieved by ensuring that such shared values are an ever-present factor in managerial decision making. What does this paper add? The importance of value congruence in building and sustaining a healthy organisational culture is confirmed by the evidence presented in the Bundaberg Hospital Inquiry. The presence of strong individual values among staff and strong espoused values in line with community expectations and backed up by legislation and ethics regimes were not, in themselves, sufficient to ensure a healthy organisational culture and prevent unethical, and possibly illegal, behaviour. What are the implications for practitioners? Managers must incorporate ethics in decision making to establish and maintain the nexus between individual and organisational values that is a vital component of a healthy organisational culture.

Enhancing professional ethics : service-learning in teacher education

The ethical conduct of professionals has been the focus of increasing scrutiny over the past several decades as members of the public, the media, professional bodies, and legislative authorities have struggled to define ethical behaviour in times of governmental change, increasing internationalisation, globalised communications, threats of terrorism, and the challenges of developments in science and medicine (e.g., Demmke & Bossaert, 2004). National governments and transnational bodies have responded to these concerns about ethics and corruption through measures such as the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2004), Transparency International’s annual corruption index (2010) and Queensland’s Public Sector Ethics Act 1994 (Queensland Parliament 1994). Similarly, academic interest in ethics and its application across a range of domains(e.g., business, health care, social welfare, criminal justice, law, journalism, defence, environment, and media) has also increased. To illustrate, in 1993, a non-partisan, non-profit national umbrella organisation, the Australian Association for Professional and Applied Ethics, was formed following a conference concerned with the teaching of ethics (http://www.arts.unsw.edu.au./aapae/about_aapae/about_aapae.htm), while a recent review of the Excellence in Research for Australian rankings of national and international academic journals revealed that 16 journals related to ethics had received the top ratings of A* or A (Australian Research Council, 2009). In this chapter we examine professional ethics and argue, with specific reference to the context of pre-service teacher education, that Service-learning is one way of enhancing emerging professionals’ understanding of ethics.

Getting more than the judgment debtor can give?

Prior to the decision of the High Court in Black v Garnock (2007) 230 CLR 438 it was an established principle in Queensland that a judgment creditor acting under an enforcement warrant could take no interest beyond what the judgment debtor could give. However, the decision of the High Court called this principle into question. This article examines the current position in the context of s 120 of the Land Title Act 1994 (Qld) , Queensland Titles Office practice and standard contractual provisions. This examination is further informed by the recent decision of Martin J in Secure Funding Pty Ltd v Doneley [2010] QSC 91.

Equitable mortgage by deposit of a Certificate of Title

In Theodore v Mistford Pty Ltd [2005] HCA 45, the High Court considered certain principles governing the creation of an equitable mortgage by the deposit of a title deed as first developed by the English courts of equity with respect to old system conveyancing. The decision will be of interest to Queensland practitioners as it concerned the application of these equitable principles to Torrens land regulated by the provisions of the Land Title Act 1994 (Qld) and, in particular, the operation of s 75 of the Land Title Act 1994 (Qld) which provides: (i) An equitable mortgage of a lot may be created by leaving a certificate of title with the mortgagee (ii) Subsection (1) does not affect the ways in which an equitable mortgage may be created.

Marketeers beware

The practices of marketeers in the Queensland property market have been the subject of intense media interest and have caused widespread consumer concern. In response to these concerns the Queensland government has amended the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 (Qld) (“the Act”). Significant changes to the Act were introduced by the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Amendment Act 2001 (Qld) (“the amending Act”). Implicit in the introduction of the amending Act was recognition that marketeers had altered their operating tactics to avoid the requirements of the Act. The amendments enhance regulation and are intended to capture the conduct of all persons involved in unconscionable practices that have lead to dysfunction in certain sectors of the Queensland property market. The amending Act is focussed on a broad regulatory response rather than further regulation of specific occupations in the property sale process as it was recognised that the approach of industry regulation had proven to be inadequate to curtail marketeering practices and to protect the interests of consumers. As well as providing for increased disclosure obligations on real estate agents, property developers and lawyers together with an extension of the 5 business day cooling-off period to all contracts (other than auction contracts) for the sale of residential property in Queensland; in an endeavour to further protect consumer interests the amending Act provides for increased jurisdiction and powers to the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) enabling the Tribunal to deal with claims against marketeers. These provisions commenced on the date of assent (21 September 2001). The aim of this article is to examine the circumstances in which marketeers will contravene the legislation and the ramifications.

The requirement to 'Start a Proceeding' to prevent the lapse of a caveat

Section 126 of the Land Title Act 1994 (Qld) regulates whether, and if so, when a caveat will lapse. While certain caveats will not lapse due to the operation of s 126(1), if a caveator does not wish a caveat to which the section applies to lapse, the caveator must start a proceeding in a court of competent jurisdiction to establish the interest claimed under the caveat within the time limits specified in, and otherwise comply with the obligations imposed by, s 126(4). The requirement, in s 126(4), to “start a proceeding” was the subject of judicial examination by the Court of Appeal (McMurdo P, Holmes JA and MacKenzie J) in Cousins Securities Pty Ltd v CEC Group Ltd [2007] QCA 192.

State of Origin : Queensland Crown Leasehold - lessons from New South Wales

Throughout Australia freehold land interests are protected by statutory schemes which grant indefeasibility of title to registered interests. Queensland freehold land interests are protected by Torrens system established by the Land Title Act 1994. However, no such protection exists for Crown land interests. The extent of Queensland occupied under some form of Crown tenure, in excess of 70%, means that Queensland Crown land users are disadvantaged when compared to freehold land users. This article examines the role indefeasibility of title has in protecting interests in Crown land. A comparative analysis is undertaken between Queensland and New South Wales land management frameworks to determine whether interests in crown land are adequately protected in Queensland.

Environmental law and the economic impact on Australian firms

In response to international awareness of environmental issues and the inadequacies of common law actions, legislation has been enacted by Australian governments to facilitate environmental protection. The Environmental Protection Act 1994 (Qld) and accompanying Environmental Protection (Interim) Regulation 1995 (Qld) is one example of government response to mounting public pressure to legislate for the environment. Investigation into the operation of the legislation exposes the costs faced by Australian firms in its application. The legislation identifies a number of environmentally relevant activities and imposes licensing and reporting requirements on firms undertaking such activities. In view of these legislative requirements and the increasing public awareness of environmental issues over the last decade in Australia, it could be expected that firms undertaking environmentally sensitive activities will place greater importance on the management of environmental issues. If so, the greater prominence placed on environmental management may be reflected in disclosures made by the firm to its shareholders and other interested parties. This article investigates the type and extent of costs currently imposed by the body of environmental laws in Australia with the discussion primarily focusing upon costs imposed due to the operation of environmental legislation in Queensland. Further, the article reports empirical analysis of management response to environmental issues where firms are undertaking environmentally sensitive activities.

Assignment of lease between lessees as joint tenants-is lessor’s consent required?

The decision of Lockrey v Historic Houses Trust of New South Wales [2012] NSWSC 654 raises an interesting issue about the necessity of seeking the consent of the lessor where there is an assignment of a lease between joint tenants who already hold the lease when one joint tenant sells the business operated on the leased premises to the other joint tenant. A secondary issue raised by the proceedings concerns whether the lessor’s consent was unreasonably withheld under the processes under Retail Leases Act 1994 (NSW) (“the Act”) upon the grounds of lack of provision of information as to the remaining lessee’s financial standing.

Adverse possession and Crown Leasehold in Queensland

The decision of Eckford v Stanbroke Pastoral Co Pty Ltd [2012] QSC 48 ,although a decision refusing summary judgement raises a very important question of the ability to claim adverse possession of a pastoral lease issued in 1956 under the Land Act 1962 (Queensland).Division 5 of Part 6 of the Land Title Act 1994 (Qld) which guarantees registered freehold title expressly deals with the right of adverse possession however, there is no such provision in the present Land Act 1994 unlike s 170 of the Crown Lands Act 1989(NSW) which expressly precludes claims for adverse possession of specified non freehold land. There is no mention of adverse possession in any version of the Queensland Land Acts and only s 6(4) of the Limitation of Actions Act 1974 makes it clear that “the right, title or interest of the Crown” in or to any land is not affected by any adverse possessor.It is against the background that the Court considered the right of an adverse possessor to a Crown lease.

The landlord's duty and unsafe premises

Case note on Sheehy v Hobbs [2012]. It is well established that a landlord owes a tenant a duty of care to “take reasonable care to avoid foreseeable risk of injury to their prospective tenants and members of their household”.1 What often arises is the question of how far the scope of that duty extends. In Sheehy v Hobbs [2012] QSC 333 the plaintiff was injured when she fell down a flight of internal stairs of the townhouse she leased from the defendants. The plaintiff claimed damages for a breach of duty owed to her in negligence, and also alleged breaches of the duties owed to her pursuant to s 103 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1994 (Qld) and her tenancy agreement.

The caveat in Queensland : getting it off!

This article critically analyses the provisions by which a caveat against dealings may be cleared from a land title in Queensland, namely ss 126, 127 and 128 of the Land Title Act 1994(Qld). It includes a comparison of the current provisions with the pre-existing law and provides a comprehensive guide as to the circumstances in which, and the manner by which, the current provisions may be utilised to clear caveats from land titles in Queensland.

Compensation for logdment of caveat without reasonable cause

This article examines s130 of the Land Title Act 1994 (Qld) in detail, and includes an analysis of authorities which have interpreted comparable provisions in other Australian jurisdictions and in New Zealand. Its purpose is to provide a comprehensive guide as to the circumstances in which the court may now be expected to award compensation in respect of the lodgment or continuance of a caveat in Queensland. Finally, the author considers whether the changes which have been embodied in s130 may now be regarded as providing adequate protection for persons who suffer damage as a result of the lodgment or continuance of a caveat which cannot ultimately be sustained.

Compensation sought for an improper caveat

Re Brooks’ Caveat [2014] QSC 76 is a decision of Henry J delivered on 24 April 2014. The decision considers the operation of s 130 of the Land Title Act 1994 (Qld). That section provides that a person who lodges or continues a caveat without reasonable cause must compensate anyone else who suffers loss or damage as a result...