In Stella v Griffith University [2025] QCA 203 Bradley JA comments
[5] The respondent (the University) is a university established by statute to advance, develop and disseminate knowledge and promote scholarship, with a focus on study, research, and recognition in the form of conferring degrees.
[6] A well-tempered university serves the public interest, including in ways identified in Schedule 4, Part 2 of the Right to Information Act 2009 (Qld) (RTI Act). It can promote open discussion of public affairs, contribute to positive and informed debate on important issues or matters of serious interest, ensure effective oversight of expenditure of public funds, allow or assist inquiry into possible deficiencies in the conduct or administration of an agency or official, advance the fair treatment of individuals and other entities in accordance with the law in their dealings with agencies, contribute to the protection of the environment, reveal environmental or health risks or measures relating to public health and safety, contribute to the maintenance of peace and order, contribute to the administration of justice generally or for a person, and contribute to innovation and the facilitation of research.
[7] Students share a status as members of the university with the chancellor and others in administration, and the academic staff in teaching and research roles. The relationship between university members has been described as domestic. Its quality may vary from time to time. It may be at its best when aligned and directed to the university’s noble objects; and at its least when splintered or transactional. The relationship is not that between a customer and a service provider.Mr Stella s analysis of a student as a “client” of a university is wholly inadequate.
[8] Whatever the state of the relationship, it is important that university decision-makers can engage openly with colleagues about how they should deal with a complaint about a student’s conduct. Such a decision concerns the interactions between and amongst students, staff, and administrators. It affects the relationship between the members of the university. In Mr Stella s case, the complaint involved questions about intellectual freedom – in the form of critical and open debate and inquiry in a public forum, and the desire “to afford others respect and courtesy in the manner of its exercise.” Such decisions call for prudent judgment. They were part of the internal management and domestic affairs of the University.
