QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND 
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:	QCT v DHN [2022] QCAT 406	
PARTIES:	Queensland College of teachers	

(applicant)	

	v	
	DHN	

(respondent)	

APPLICATION NO/S:	OCR135-21	
MATTER TYPE:	Occupational regulation matters	
DELIVERED ON:	15 November 2022	
HEARING DATE:	On the Papers	
HEARD AT:	Brisbane	
DECISION OF:	Member Paratz AM
Member English
Member Lee
	
ORDERS:	1.	A ground for disciplinary action under Section 92(1)(h) of the Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld) is established.
2.	The teacher registration of DHN is cancelled under section 160(2)(d) of the Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld).
3.	DHN is prohibited from reapplying for teacher registration or permission to teach for two (2) years from 21 February 2020 (the date of the suspension of his teacher registration) under section 160(2)(j) of the Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld).
4.	The Register of Teachers is to be endorsed with a notation under section 160(2)(i) as follows:
Should the respondent re-apply for registration or permission to teach after the prohibition period, the application must be accompanied by:
(a)	An independent psychological report satisfactory to the Queensland College of Teachers addressing the following:
An assessment as to whether the psychologist is satisfied that the respondent has adequately understood and addressed the following matters:
(i)	Awareness of appropriate and inappropriate communication and behaviour with children and young people;
(ii)	Awareness of the impact of inappropriate communication and behaviour on children and young people, their families, schools, the community and the profession;
(iii)	Awareness of differentiation between personal and professional relationships with children and young people;
(iv)	How to assess risks and identify potentially problematic situations early;
(v)	Awareness of appropriate referral channels and the intervention strategies to assist with at risk and/or vulnerable children and young people;
(vi)	How to achieve realistic solutions to avoid the risk of harm to children and young people;
(vii)	Awareness of the extent and nature of the trust and power invested in teachers by students, colleagues, parents and the wider community;
(viii)	Awareness of behaviour that would compromise the professional standing of a teacher and the profession of teaching; and
(ix)	The need to protect children and students from psychological and emotional harm;
(x)	The concept and importance of professional boundaries;
(xi)	The development and maintenance of professional standards and professional boundaries when working with students;
(xii)	The legal obligations and the duty of care which arises between teachers and students; and
(xiii)	The importance of full adherence to the Queensland College of Teachers Code of Ethics.
(b)	Confirmation that the psychologist was provided with copies of:
(i)	the Tribunal’s orders and reasons for decision; and
(ii)	the Queensland College of Teachers referral under section 97 of the Act.
5.	DNH must bear all costs of, and associated with, compliance with the Tribunal orders.
6.	Publication is prohibited, pursuant to Section 66 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) other than to the parties to this proceeding, and until further order of the tribunal, of information that may identify the teacher, a relevant student or former student, or the relevant school, other than to the extent necessary to enable the Queensland College of Teachers to meet its statutory obligations and as provided under the Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 (Qld).
The teacher may provide a copy of this decision to any regulatory authority or employer in compliance with any disclosure requirements.
	
CATCHWORDS:	EDUCATION – SCHOOLS– TEACHERS’ EMPLOYMENT AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE – DISCIPLINARY MATTERS - where a mature and experienced teacher engaged in communication on social media with a student - where the communication promoted illicit drug use and the consumption of alcohol – where no drugs or alcohol were actually supplied by the teacher to the student – whether disciplinary ground exists – standard of behaviour generally expected of a teacher – appropriate order 
Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 Qld s 92(1)(h), s 160(2)(d), s 160(2)(i), s 160(2)(j)

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 Qld s 66
Queensland College of Teachers v CJX [2018] QCAT 117
Queensland College of Teachers v XBW [2019] QCAT 240
Queensland College of Teachers v DTC [2020] QCAT 95
Queensland College of Teachers v REC [2020] QCAT 178
Queensland College of Teachers v MZX [2020] QCAT 192
Queensland College of Teachers v NRR [2021] QCAT 152	
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]	DHN (the teacher) was employed as a Health and Physical Education Teacher at a regional school in Queensland in 2018. 
[2]	Following an investigation into allegations of inappropriate and/or overfamiliar communication with a 15-year-old female student (the student), the Queensland College of Teachers (the College) determined that he posed an unacceptable risk of harm to children, and his registration was suspended from 21 February 2020. 
[3]	The suspension was continued by the Tribunal, and a non-publication order was made, on 24 March 2020.
[4]	The matter was referred to the Tribunal on 27 May 2021 pursuant to section 97 of the Education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005 to decide whether a ground for disciplinary action against the teacher was established.
[5]	Directions were given by the Tribunal for the filing of submissions and the hearing of the matter on the papers. Submissions were received from the College and the teacher.  This is our decision in the matter.
The allegations
[6]	The College particularised the allegations as follows:
It is alleged that whilst a registered teacher employed at (the school), (the teacher):
1. 	On unknown dates between July 2018 and 30 November 2018, (the teacher) engaged in inappropriate and/or overfamiliar communication during school hours at (the school) with (the student), knowing that:
o	(the student) was aged 15 years old;
o	there was a current direct teacher/student relationship; and
o	(the student) had additional vulnerabilities including that she was an illicit drug user, disengaged with schooling, and planned to leave high school after Year 10
including (but not limited to):
a)	discussing with (the student) his work as a DJ.
b)	discussing with (the student) her party habits.
c)	discussing with (the student) what illicit drugs she used.
d)	discussing with (the student) what illicit drugs he used.
e)	inviting (the student) to attend his parties.
f)	offering to supply illicit drugs to (the student).
g)	referring (the student) to his Instagram account (named account)
2. 	Between 9 November 2018 and 15 February 2019, engaged in inappropriate and/or overfamiliar social media communication with (the student) through Instagram, including (but not limited to):
h)	 Exchanging direct messages with (the student)
i.	9 November 2018:
T: 	Hey fav! Let me know how u go
S: 	Ahaha yess! Of course I will

ii.	10 November 2018:
T: 	My retarded live video lol (surprised and laughing emojis)
	Hope you had a wikkid night! Looks like you were
S;  	Ahhaha yeah I did
Your live was funny and then I saw teachers getting on it so I was like fuck better get off

iii.	13 November 2018:
S:  	I’m coming to school tomorrow for once (caring emoji)
T;  	Missed me teaching ur period 7 today (cheeky emoji)
	Was boring without ya
S:  	Awwww:((((((
T:  	I know!
S:  	That makes me sad
T: 	Haha don’t be… Plenty more hangs (positive emojis)
S: 	Ahaha
	I have a Wednesday tomorrow
T;  	That sux!
	Not long till you never have to be there again tho
S:  	Yeah that’s true

iv.	19 November 2018
T:	Hey hope you all good
S:	Yeah I’m alright I just hate school (laughing emoji)
T:  	Ha ha fair enough
	Glad you ok

i)	Supporting (the students) illicit drug and/or alcohol use:
i.	28 November 2018
T:  	You celebrating last ever (school name) day?! (Positive emojis)
S: 	I’m getting sooooo fucked upppp!!!!
T: 	Haha yeeeew!! (Fist bump emojis)
S: 	Woop woop (positive emoji)

S: 	Hahahah nah we will see each other all the time and get fucked uppp
T: 	Haha yessss!!!

ii.	12 January 2019
S: 	Ooooo fun, not much aye just been getting fucked up. We         gotta get on it sometime soon with (name)
T:	 Yeah defo!..

j)	Inviting (the student) to attend a private residence to consume illicit drugs and party with him:
28 November 2018:
T:	Glad you down!! Esp after your ‘I’ll probably never see  you again’ comment today lol (laughing emojis)
S:  	Hahahah nah we will see each other all the time
    	And get fucked uppp
T: 	Haha yesss!!! Well I’ll organise it all, you just keep a day     free. Maybe next Thursday night. Teachers last day (positive emoji) or another day - so much holidays!! (evil emoji)
S:  	Yeah done done done!!!! Yoooo (laughing emojis)
T: 	Fuck yeah!!! Gonna be wikkid (fire emojis) you haven’t seen the best me yet lol only (Teacher’s last name) the teacher. Haha party (teacher’s first name) is wayyy more fun!!
S:  	Yayyayaya I’m excited!!!! (Positive emojis)

4 December 2018:
T:  	Hey (smiling emoji) let me know when’s best for yal? Apparently iv got to go into work on Friday now (angry emoji)!!! So can’t do Thursday night. Could do Friday or Saturday start at like 2pm? But if you already got plans and all good, we can leave it for another time??

5 December 2018:
S:  	Yeah I can do what ever just tell me whenever you’re free (cheeky emoji)
T:  	Okay this Friday 2pm (positive emoji) send me an address and I’ll send an Uber to get you

6 December 2018:
T:  	Better be excited yo! (Fist bump and evil emojis)

7 December 2018

T:  	Oi! You still up for today!!? All good either way just let me know (cheeky emoji)

17 December 2018
S:  	I deadest broke my phone I’m so so sorry, let’s do it this week!! (Smiling emoji)
T:   	Hey bril! No worries at all, some other friends came (apartment on the beach (cheeky emoji)) they were glad you didn’t make it haha my mexican connection has gone awol for a bit I’ll let you know when I know..

12 January 2019:
S: 	Ooooo fun, not much aye just been getting fucked up. We gotta get on it sometime soon with (name)
T:  	Yeah defo! I’m moving end of this month…into a place just me, will be easier then. Gonna fully set the lounge up with vinyl and cdj’s etc will be wikkid!! (Positive emoji)
My fav will be first on the guest list haha
S:  	Yoooo

k) 	Supporting (the student’s) attempts to obtain alcohol:

15 February 2019:

S:  	Oi oi oi
     	I have a question

T:  	Hey (emoji) just shopping with (name)..but shoot what’s up?

S:  	Do you have any shit
     	like anything
     	 Cause everyone is being a hardcore fuck around and me     and my friend need to get fucked up tinycht

T:  	No (sad emoji) it’s my weekend with my son
S:  	tonight
     	where are you shopping?
T: 	(name of shop)
S:  	(crying emojis)
T:  	Sorry!!!! (Sad emoji) 
     	Bad timing

S: 	do you think you could get me drinks or too redhot because     of ur son?

T: 	Next weekend Defo but I can’t now (sad emoji)
    	What (name)’s brother?
   	(name)..?

S:  	yeah I think so

T:  	he might help if (name) asks
	I’d 100% help if it was a no (name) weekend

3. 	On 28 November 2018 offered to supply (the student) illicit drugs:
28 November 2018
T: 	Sorry I wasn’t more fun for your last day!! Will make up for it for tho (okay emoji)
we’ll catch up and I’ll shout you my good stuff       (crazy emoji)
will be amazing – no (name) tho yeh?

S:  	yooooooo yesss good idea (cheeky emoji)
    	Is it actually really good shit?

T: 	It’s diff strength each time -but it’s more like a c than e
    	I’ll bring other stuff tho too (assuring emoji)
T:  	Glad you down!! Esp after your ‘I’ll probably never see you again’ comment today lol (laughing emojis)
S:  	Hahahah nah we will see each other all the time
    	And get FUCKED UPPP
T: 	Haha yesss!!! Well I’ll organise it all, you just keep a day     free. Maybe next Thursday night. Teachers last day (positive emoji) or another day - so much holidays!! (Laughing emoji)
S:  	Yeah done done done!!!! Yoooo (laughing emojis)
T: 	Fuck yeah!!! Gonna be wikkid (fire emojis) you haven’t seen    the best me yet lol only (Teacher’s last name) the teacher. Haha party (teacher’s first name) is wayyy more fun!!
S:  	Yayyayaya I’m excited!!!! (Positive emojis)

The Student’s Evidence
[7]	The student was interviewed by two investigators from the College in the presence of her mother as a support person on 12 February 2020. 
[8]	She said that she had left the school at the end of year 10 in 2018. 
[9]	She said that she had got along really well with her PE teacher because he was just like a young teacher:
I guess he was just my PE teacher really. We just, we got along really well. ‘Cause he’s just, I don’t know, he’s just like a young teacher. He just started talking to me about how he was like a DJ and then we just like got along with that, ‘cause like I told him, oh, I like to go out partying and just things like that, but yeah, mainly he was just my PE teacher.
[10]	She said that she had texted the teacher on social media using her private Instagram account and his Instagram account. 
[11]	She said that the teacher had invited her, and a couple of other girls to his ‘DJ place’:
He just said, well he said it to me and a couple of other, the girls at school. He just said, if you guys like are keen to party, I can like get you an Uber to like my DJ place. You can come hang out there and you can invite your friends, just I guess get it bigger, bigger the party, I guess.
[12]	She said that she did not ever attend any venue with the teacher, and did not ever meet up with him, outside of school. 
[13]	She said that ‘I guess he offered’ drugs, but that she never took it; and said he did not ever supply her with any alcohol or drugs.
[14]	She said that she started following the teacher on Instagram towards the end of her time at the school.
[15]	She said that she had a conversation about drugs with the teacher in a classroom, during a free period, when she was ‘just sitting at his desk talking to him’.
[16]	She said that the expressions ‘pingers’, MD, and coke, referred to drugs.

The Teacher’s submissions
[17]	The teacher filed submissions in the Tribunal on 19 March 2020 as to the suspension consideration, and submitted that:
(a)	He does not currently, and never has taken or been in possession of drugs, and has never supplied drugs or alcohol to anyone.
(b)	In 21 years of teaching he had never had inappropriate dealings with a student.
(c)	He is a practising Christian who had worked diligently and successfully in several senior roles for 18 years.
(d)	As part of his ministry he is a Christian DJ and music producer who makes Christian music to reach people and all proceeds go to a charity. 
(e)	In 2018 he was asked by the school to coach a sports team, and the student asked to transfer to the team. 
(f)	He became very concerned with the student’s well-being, and asked her to go and see a Chaplain on the well-being team or her Head of Year, but she declined and said they were very judgemental and unhelpful, and that she was only prepared to talk to him. 
(g)	He had taught a troubled student that year who was withdrawn and displaying worrying behaviour, who subsequently committed suicide, and he is still extremely traumatised to this day about it, so has always been paranoid about teen suicide and would do anything to prevent it. 
(h)	He was extremely concerned for the student’s well-being, and had several informal meetings with her Head of Year about how he was trying to be supportive of the student, but ultimately felt the weight of responsibility on himself to deal with the situation. 
(i)	He didn’t know what to do about the student as he was out of his depth, but felt he couldn’t abandon her. He was in a terrible state and very traumatised by the situation which he was woefully unequipped to deal with. 
(j)	He felt it was absolutely vital to keep a line of communication open with the student, and in order to put her at ease, he used similar language which he felt she could relate to. 
(k)	The ‘whole thing’ on his part was a pretence, and he would never have taken drugs, supplied drugs, organised an Uber, or partied with the student; and that the entire purpose of the communication was to try and help and support and possibly resolve an incredibly difficult situation. 
(l)	The student asked him if they could party, or if he would buy her alcohol, and he would never have considered this, but was still concerned about her well-being and did not want to upset her, so told her ‘not now but maybe in the future’.
(m)	He could honestly say that he doesn’t specifically remember writing all of the communications, and they are so ‘out of character’ for him that reading them made him feel nauseous and traumatised. 
(n)	He accepts that he handled the situation incredibly badly, that it has already cost him his long and much cherished job at the school, and that it may cost him his entire teaching career, but that he always had the student’s best interests at heart.
[18]	He filed further submissions in the Tribunal on 21 June 2021, in response to the submissions of the College. 
[19]	He denied that his motives for the communication were self-serving as he ‘gained nothing from my communications with (the student) other than to provide moral support to a fellow human being who was going through a very hard time’. 
[20]	He described the student as ‘anti-establishment’, and that she confided serious issues to him.
[21]	He described his reason for his behaviour as being under pressure:
My dilemma in dealing with (the student) was that, if I had done the right thing and reported her case to a higher authority, she could have felt betrayed and abandoned by the only person who is prepared to listen to her. I agonised over this as I knew I should report it, I felt stressed and under pressure and was not thinking straight. I tried to be supportive and help her through a difficult time by being someone she could talk to, regardless of the subject. However, upon reflection, I realise that I should have instantly reported the situation to the principal and I’m very sorry that I didn’t.

Submissions of the College
[22]	The College submitted as to the behaviour expected of a teacher that:
(a)	Teachers are bestowed with a high level of trust by students, parents and the wider community, and, with that trust, an expectation it will not be breached (Queensland College of Teachers v DGM [2018] QCAT 194). 
(b)	By virtue of a teacher’s position, disparities in age, maturity and life experience, and the inherent vulnerability of young people, there is a power imbalance between teachers and students (Queensland College of Teachers v PPK [2019] QCAT 59).
(c)	Teachers have a responsibility not to engage in conduct which harms, or has the potential to harm, students.
[23]	It submits that the teacher failed to maintain professional boundaries, acted beyond the scope of practice, and failed to obtain appropriate support for a vulnerable 15 year old child. 
[24]	It notes that the teacher was an experienced teacher, who had been registered for almost 21 years. 
[25]	It submits that the teacher’s conduct normalised and supported the student’s ‘partying’, illicit drug taking and alcohol consumption.
[26]	It notes that whilst the impacts of the teacher’s conduct on the student are not known to the College, that ‘it is reasonable to consider the likelihood of negative impacts on the student’s perception of age-appropriate behaviours and that of mature teachers, during the formative adolescent period in her life’.

Orders Sought by the College
[27]	The College submits that the following orders represent an appropriate sanction in the matter:
7.	Grounds for disciplinary action under section 92(1)(h) of the Act is established.
8.	The respondent’s teacher registration be cancelled under section 160(2)(d) of the Act.
9.	The respondent is prohibited from reapplying for teacher registration or permission to teach for 2-4 years from 21 February 2020 (the date of the suspension of his teacher registration) under section 160(2)(j) of the Act; and
10.	The Register of Teachers is to be endorsed with a notation under section 160(2)(i) as follows:
Should the respondent re-apply for registration or permission to teach after the prohibition period, the application must be accompanied by:
(c)	An independent psychological report satisfactory to the QCT addressing the following:
An assessment as to whether the psychologist is satisfied that the respondent has adequately understood and addressed the following matters:
(xiv)	Awareness of appropriate and inappropriate communication and behaviour with children and young people;
(xv)	Awareness of the impact of inappropriate communication and behaviour on children and young people, their families, schools, the community and the profession;
(xvi)	Awareness of differentiation between personal and professional relationships with children and young people;
(xvii)	How to assess risks and identify potentially problematic situations early;
(xviii)	Awareness of appropriate referral channels and the intervention strategies to assist with at risk and/or vulnerable children and young people;
(xix)	How to achieve realistic solutions to avoid the risk of harm to children and young people;
(xx)	Awareness of the extent and nature of the trust and power invested in teachers by students, colleagues, parents and the wider community;
(xxi)	Awareness of behaviour that would compromise the professional standing of a teacher and the profession of teaching; and
(xxii)	The need to protect children and students from psychological and emotional harm;
(xxiii)	The concept and importance of professional boundaries;
(xxiv)	The development and maintenance of professional standards and professional boundaries when working with students;
(xxv)	The legal obligations and the duty of care which arises between teachers and students; and
(xxvi)	The importance of full adherence to the Queensland College of Teachers Code Of Ethics.
(d)	Confirmation that the psychologist was provided with copies of:
(iii)	the Tribunal’s orders and reasons for decision; and
(iv)	the QCT referral under section 97 of the Act.
11.	The respondent must bear all costs of, and associated with, compliance with the Tribunal orders.

Legislative provisions
[28]	The relevant provisions as to the grounds for disciplinary action are provided for in Section 92 of the Act as follows:
92 Grounds for disciplinary action
(1)	Each of the following is a ground for disciplinary action against a relevant teacher—
(h)	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;
[29]	If the College reasonably believes that one or more grounds for disciplinary action against a ‘relevant teacher’ exist, the College must refer the matter to a disciplinary body under s 97 of the Act. In relation to this matter, the relevant body is the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’).
[30]	The relevant provisions as to cancellation of a teacher’s registration, making a notation on the register, and making an order prohibiting the teacher from reapplying for registration or permission to teach, or making other appropriate orders, are provided for in section 160 of the Act as follows:
160 Decision about disciplinary action against approved teacher
(1)	 This section applies if the relevant teacher is an approved teacher.
(2) 	If QCAT decides a ground for disciplinary action against the relevant teacher has been established, QCAT may do 1 or more of the following—
(d)	 cancel the teacher’s registration or permission to teach;
(i)	 make an order that a particular notation or endorsement about the teacher be entered in the register;
(j) 	if QCAT cancels the teachers’ 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;
(k) 	make another order QCAT considers appropriate;

Discussion
[31]	The communication by the teacher to the student is not disputed. The topic and meaning of that communication is clear. The teacher has used contemporary language which he thought the student would relate to.
[32]	There is no question that the communication, and the content, was wholly inappropriate by a teacher to a student.
[33]	The teacher accepts that the communication was inappropriate, regrets having had such communication, and cannot explain his actions other than to say it stemmed from his being under stress and trying to assist a student who needed help.
[34]	The appropriate course of conduct for the teacher is obvious, when he became concerned about the well-being of the student, which was to report his concerns through the well established processes available at the school.
[35]	The teacher did not carry through any of his invitations to party, or to take drugs, which he made in his social media contact with the student. He did not provide the student with any drugs or alcohol, or have any meetings with her outside the school.
[36]	The events suggest that the teacher, perhaps in an attempt to cultivate the trust of the student, engaged in a wholly inappropriate course of conversation by showing how ‘cool’ and relatable he was.
[37]	The teacher was aware that the student was involved in the ‘drug scene’, and it is possible that he used his interest as a music DJ to frame a persona which he portrayed to the student, of his being a fun, partying, person who was part of the ‘drug scene’, who she could open up to and discuss her problems with.
[38]	An alternative possibility is open, that the teacher was deriving some form of gratification by playing the role of a young ‘cool’ person, and enjoyed interacting with the student on that level.
[39]	Whatever the teacher’s motivations were, the result was that the teacher failed to act in an appropriate and responsible manner.
[40]	The teacher was 41 years of age at the time of the communications. He was an experienced teacher. He does not have any previous history of inappropriate behaviour. He has been suspended as a teacher since 21 February 2020.
[41]	The College advised that it was unaware of any previous decisions with similar facts as the current matter which may assist the Tribunal. It referred the Tribunal to five previous decisions as to sanction, noting that they involved sexualised communication and interactions with students, but referring to similarities in them: 
Further, the QCT recognises that the cases below involved sexualised communication and interactions with students, whereas sexualised conduct is not alleged nor evident in the current matter. However, similarities may be drawn in the respondent’s maturity, level of experience and position of trust and the conduct exhibiting a breach of professional boundaries.
[42]	In Queensland College of Teachers v CJX [2018] QCAT 117, an experienced and mature teacher engaged in highly sexualised communications with a vulnerable year 12 student while he held a pastoral care role. The teacher sent the student highly sexualised emails, and exchanged nude images.
The Tribunal found the teacher displayed a complete disregard for the student’s well-being and the harm he caused due to her known vulnerabilities, and ordered a four year prohibition from the date of suspension and a notation on the register requiring a psychological report on reapplication.
[43]	In Queensland College of Teachers v XBW [2019] QCAT 240, a mature 49-year-old teacher in a leadership position sent sexualised communication to a year 12 student.
There was no evidence of insight for its boundary violations over an extended period, and the teacher did not cooperate or participate in the Tribunal process. The Tribunal cancelled his registration and ordered three years six months prohibition, with a notation for a psychological report on reapplication.
[44]	In Queensland College of Teachers v DTC [2020] QCAT 95, a 34-year-old teacher engaged in over 44,000 messages including sexualised content and photographs over a period of approximately 11 months, which progressed to sexual intercourse with a 17-year-old student.
The teacher initially denied the student had been exposed to harm however eventually agreed the conduct was wrong. The Tribunal cancelled the teacher’s registration and ordered a five year prohibition and a notation on the register requiring a psychological report on reapplication.
[45]	In Queensland College of Teachers V REC [2020] QCAT 178, a 22-year-old teacher engaged in inappropriate interactions with a 16-year-old student over a two month period, including texting and nude photographs. The teacher drove the student in his vehicle, kissed her, and attended her home on two occasions when they were alone.
The teacher’s cooperation with the Tribunal process was regarded as a demonstration of remorse and insight. The Tribunal cancelled his registration and ordered a 12 month prohibition and a notation requiring a psychological report on reapplication.
[46]	In Queensland College of Teachers v MZX [2020] QCAT 192 the teacher was alleged to have engaged in inappropriate exchanges with a year 12 student over social media, referring to his skateboard business, and requesting inappropriate and revealing images in exchange for an ‘A’ grade, and sent naked photos of himself.
The Tribunal found that not all the allegations as to inappropriate images could be confirmed, but found that the teacher engaged in inappropriate communications by ‘liking’ the students photos on Instagram, and replying to her photos with ‘heart eyes’ emojis.
The Tribunal ended the teacher’s suspension (approximately 12 months after suspension was made) and ordered the teacher to provide a psychological report within six months of the Tribunal order to the College’s satisfaction.
[47]	The teacher filed submissions on 13 September 2021 as to sanction, and referred to another case which had been cited by the College in their submissions, of Queensland College of Teachers v NRR [2021] QCAT 152.
The teacher suggested that case had similarities as it involved communications with three former students which included reference to drug, alcohol and steroid use, intimate and/or sexual communications, and the exchange of intimate and/or sexual images, and accepting an invitation to meet with one of the former students.
[48]	The teacher made the following submissions as to an appropriate sanction, with reference to NRR, and to the effect of these matters upon him:
Teacher NRR was given a sanction of two years and nine months in a case which included sexual aspects and a meeting. Therefore in my case I would suggest that a sanction of two years from 21 February 2020 may be appropriate, which is within the range suggested by Queensland College of Teachers.
Whilst I take full responsibility for my mistakes, this matter has had a devastating effect on my life and I feel that I have lost everything: my career, my job, my income, my home (without income I could not afford rent), my car, my friends and colleagues, and most importantly it has had a severe detrimental effect on my mental health.
I would again like to sincerely apologise for my actions. I genuinely feel remorseful and I’m very willing to undergo counselling to improve myself and prevent a recurrence of this matter in the future.
[49]	The teacher in this matter is a mature person and an experienced teacher who knew what he should have done in the situation. He was a physical education teacher, and should be promoting healthy habits, which are the complete opposite to illicit drug taking.
[50]	The matter has had a serious impact upon the teacher’s life.
[51]	No information has been provided as to the effect of the communication upon the student.
[52]	Whilst the teacher has engaged in open discussion about drug taking, and wanting to party with the student, he did not actually engage in any such activity with her.
[53]	The teacher has referred to his state of well-being as being affected by the suicide of a student, but the Investigator points out that the records show that the former student in question did not pass away from suicide until after the alleged conduct occurred, so could have had no impact upon his behaviour in question.
[54]	It is unexplained as to why the teacher behaved in the way in which he did. This raises concern as to his possible future conduct, and the need for him to undergo psychological examination and report before re-admission to the profession could be granted.
[55]	In considering the comparative cases, it is to be noted that the teacher did not engage in sexualised behaviour, and did not meet the student outside school hours at all, which distinguishes it from the cases which have been discussed.
[56]	The expression ‘standard of behaviour generally expected of a teacher’ referred to in section 92(1)(h) of the Act, involves consideration of community and professional expectations and standards, as submitted by the College.
[57]	The communication raises issues of such severity, as to the apparent sanctioning and encouragement of illicit drug use, that it clearly falls below the standard of behaviour expected by the teaching profession and the community, and a disciplinary ground is clearly established. 
[58]	The level of conduct requires that the teachers registration be cancelled, and a period of prohibition from reapplication for registration or permission to teach be imposed, as in the comparative cases referred to.
[59]	The teacher’s conduct as to the communication, and the failure to pursue the appropriate avenues of assistance for the student, do not directly equate to the conduct of teachers in the cases referred to by the College, but those cases do provide a range of sanctions ranging from a lifting of suspension to a five year prohibition.
[60]	The college has submitted that a prohibition period of 2 to 4 years should be imposed. The teacher has submitted that a period of 2 years should be imposed.
[61]	The teacher has expressed remorse for his actions, and has acknowledged that they were improper.
[62]	Having regard to the remorse of the teacher, and his open acknowledgement of inappropriate behaviour, and there being no actual implementation of the type of activity discussed in the communication, we consider that this matter should be seen to fall towards the lower end of the range of sanctions discussed.
[63]	We consider that a prohibition period of 2 years should apply from 21 February 2020 (the date of the suspension of his teacher registration). 
[64]	We consider that the restrictions as to re-application proposed by the College are reasonable and appropriate, and should apply.

Non-publication order
[65]	The College supported a permanent non-publication order under section 66 of the QCAT Act with further exceptions to allow for information sharing required in the protection of children and for the teacher to meet his disclosure obligations. 
[66]	We accept the submissions of the College as to a non-publication order with exceptions, and de-identification, as being in the best interests of children.
[67]	We make a non-publication order as follows:
Publication is prohibited, pursuant to section 66 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) other than to the parties to this proceeding, and until further order of the tribunal, of information that may identify the teacher, a relevant student or former student, or the relevant school, other than to the extent necessary to enable the Queensland College of Teachers to meet its statutory obligations and as provided under the education (Queensland College of Teachers) Act 2005.
The teacher may provide a copy of this decision to any regulatory authority or employer in compliance with any disclosure requirements.