TEACHER Y v EDUCATION COUNCIL OF AOTEAROA NEW ZEALAND [2018] NZCA 230 [24 September 2018]

TEACHER Y v EDUCATION COUNCIL OF AOTEAROA NEW ZEALAND [2018] NZCA 230 [24 September 2018]

The Court granted leave to appeal and approved four specific questions of law (jurisdiction, whether use of restorative justice can constitute serious misconduct under s139AB, whether the appellant was a decision maker with power to initiate disciplinary investigation, and the applicability of s77), directing the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] NZCA 230
Parties
Appellant: Teacher Y; Respondent: Education Council of Aotearoa New Zealand
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
24 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal (application for Leave) Disciplinary Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal Heard in Court of Appeal; Leave Granted
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted by the Court of Appeal
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Disciplinary Tribunal, Serious Misconduct Under S139 AB, Restorative Justice Vs Disciplinary Process, Application of S77 Education Act 1989
Education Law Administrative Law Professional Discipline Jurisdiction of Disciplinary Tribunal Serious Misconduct Under S139 AB Restorative Justice Vs Disciplinary Process Application of S77 Education Act 1989

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Teacher Y

Appellant

Education Council of Aotearoa New Zealand

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (application for Leave) Disciplinary Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal Heard in Court of Appeal; Leave Granted

  1. 1 Did the Disciplinary Tribunal have jurisdiction to consider charges arising from a report from the statutory manager of the school?
  2. 2 Could the appellant's use of a restorative justice process instead of a disciplinary investigation constitute 'serious misconduct' under s139AB of the Education Act 1989?
  3. 3 Was the appellant a decision maker with power to initiate a disciplinary investigation?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court granted leave to appeal and approved four specific questions of law (jurisdiction, whether use of restorative justice can constitute serious misconduct under s139AB, whether the appellant was a decision maker with power to initiate disciplinary investigation, and the applicability of s77), directing the appeal to focus on questions concerning serious misconduct and decision‑making power.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted by the Court of Appeal

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Approved questions of law recorded as (a)-(d) and appeal to focus on questions (b) and (c)