Queensland v Johnston [2025] QCA 142
J was suspended from teaching pending unrelated criminal charges. On acquittal, he sought lost pay on the basis he was ‘available to work’ at all times consistent with a statutory directive13. J argued that an example in the directive of detention in a correctional facility operated to confine the directive to physical availability. This was rejected.
Dictionary definitions extended to legal availability, & an example ‘is just an example’. They have a role, but the Act prevails to the extent of any inconsistency14. Examples also must not overwhelm provisions, and they are not read as exhaustive15. J was not entitled to lost pay as he was legally not ‘available to work’.
This principle is from Episode 124 of interpretation NOW!
Footnotes:
13 Directive 06/23 under s 102 of the Public Sector Act 2022 (Qld).
14 Herzfeld & Prince [5.90] citing McLaughlin [2011] NSWSC 717 [22].
15 Brooks [2000] FCA 721 [66] cited, cf Episode 95, Pearce IAIA [3.17].