In disciplinary proceedings under the Education Training Reform Act 2006 (Vic), a disciplinary appeals board's decision to substitute a lesser sanction for termination will not be legally unreasonable where the board identifies an evident and intelligible justification, including that the misconduct was out-of-character and the respondent had no history of similar behaviour. A respondent's denial of misconduct and failure to express contrition cannot be treated as aggravating the misconduct. The protective purpose of disciplinary proceedings does not require express articulation in the board's reasons provided it is evident from the substance of the reasoning. Where a concession is made that termination was not the only available outcome, the scope for a finding of legal unreasonableness is significantly narrowed.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 8 later cases that cite this judgment.