The Court held that a corrective services officer's decision to prohibit in-person contact under a DPSOA supervision order is a decision made 'under an enactment' and therefore reviewable under the Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld). The decision derives its capacity to affect legal rights from the DPSOA itself, not merely from the supervision order, satisfying both Tang criteria. The Court did not decide whether a supervision order constitutes a 'statutory instrument' under the Statutory Instruments Act 1992 (Qld).
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.