Legal interpretation-Howard v Queensland [2001] 2 Qd R 154., Summary of Whistleblowers Protection Act 1994 (Qld), Hypothetical

Howard v Queensland [2001] 2 Qd R 154. (Court of Appeal) Judges: McMurdo P, Thomas JA and Ambrose J. Facts: The appellant is the plaintiff in this action against the respondent, claiming for damages for psychiatric injury. Under the Whistleblowers Protection Act, the appellant can be classified as a whistleblower; and the allegations made by the appellant are that the actions made against him by two of his fellow employees constituted reprisal under s41 of the Act, and …showed first 75 words of 2266 total…

…showed last 75 words of 2266 total…person has a defence of absolute privilege for publishing the disclosed information" (s 39 (2) (a)). However, in the aspect of a defamation lawsuit, the 'absolute privilege' defence is invalid, as JC is not protected under the Whistleblowers Protection Act for the disclosure he made to the ABC, as it was not a relevant public entity to make the disclosure of the type (refer to paragraph (1.3). Therefore, it is likely that JC would be liable for defamation.