Support worker breached prohibition against cruel or degrading treatment by dragging man with disability across carpeted hallway
Davies v State of Victoria [2012] VSC 343 (15 August 2012)
Summary
In a landmark decision, Justice Williams of the Supreme Court found that the conduct of a disability support worker in dragging a person with an intellectual disability across a carpeted hallway such as to cause a burn or abrasion constituted “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” contrary to section 10(b) of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.
Facts
The plaintiff, Mr Davies, was employed by the Department of Human Services as a Disability Development and Support Officer. On 24 September 2009, the Department terminated his employment on the ground of “serious misconduct” following a departmental investigation into an incident on 2 May 2009 involving CJ, a person with disability in his care. Mr Davies appealed against his dismissal.
Justice Williams found that “Mr Davies dragged CJ, who was naked, approximately 1.5 metres across a carpeted hallway and in so doing, caused his injury” (namely, a large burn or abrasion on his buttock). The Court also found that Mr Davies “then failed to report the incident to his supervisor”.
Decision
The issue in this case was whether the State had established that Mr Davies’ behaviour during the incident amounted to “serious misconduct” within the meaning of s 33(1)(d) of the Public Administration Act 2004 (Vic).
While “serious misconduct” is not defined under the Act, “misconduct” is defined to include contravention of the Code of Conduct, which, in turn, requires that public officials “respect and promote the human rights set out in the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities”. Section 10(b) of the Charter provides that a person must not be treated or punished in a cruel, inhuman or degrading way.
The Court held that Mr Davies’ treatment of CJ in dragging him naked across a carpeted hallway and thereby causing injury, in circumstances where there were other options available to move CJ, amounted to “disrespectful, cruel and degrading” treatment and violated CJ’s human rights under section 10(b) of the Charter. Together with breaches of the Code of Conduct, the Court held that this, and the failure to report the incident, constituted “serious misconduct” such as to justify termination of Mr Davies’ employment.
The decision is available online at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSC/2012/343.html.
Phil Lynch is Executive Director of the Human Rights Law Centre.
Landmark decision ordering Shell to cut CO2 emissions from its global operations by 45% overturned by Hague Court of Appeal
On 12 November 2024, the Court of Appeal of the Hague overturned the landmark 2021 decision of the District Court of The Hague (District Court) in Milieudefensie et al v Royal Dutch Shell, which had ordered Shell to cut CO2 emissions from its global operations by 45% by the end of 2030.
Read more
Young campaigners landmark victory for children’s rights as new coal-fired power generation deemed unconstitutional in South Africa
The High Court of South Africa ruled that the government’s plans to add 1,500 megawatts of new coal-fired power stations were “unlawful and invalid”. In a youth-driven petition brought by three civil society organisations, the Court found that the plans failed to adequately consider the impacts of coal-fired power on children’s rights, particularly their constitutional right to a healthy environment.
Read more
Tribunal found Southern Restaurants imposed unreasonable conditions on a young breast-feeding mother leading to a finding of discrimination
A young breastfeeding mother was found to have been discriminated against by her employer and awarded $90,000 in compensation.
Read more
Acknowledgement of Country
The Human Rights Law Centre acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the lands across Australia, including the lands of the Wurundjeri, Boon Wurrung, Gadigal, Ngunnawal, Darug and Wadawurrung people where we work from.
We pay our respect to Elders past and present. This land always was, and always will be Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander land. Sovereignty has never been ceded.
WARNING: This site contains images or names of people who have passed away.