We have recently advised a number of clubs regarding instances of members behaving badly, clubs instigating a process leading to termination of membership and the member challenging that termination. Such a matter found its way this month to the Supreme Court of Queensland¹, where the member successfully challenged the termination of her membership. The decision (of the Chief Justice) reinforces the principles to be followed in such disciplinary processes.
In this matter, the Club purported to terminate the individual’s membership on the basis of allegations of conduct considered to be “injurious or prejudicial to the character and interests of the Club“. They alleged multiple instances of inappropriate behaviour and disruptive conduct during matches, use of intimidating and offensive language towards other participants and members, and aggressive engagement with other members and employees. The Club claimed they sent the member a number of letters by email warning her to address her behaviour, culminating in written notice of a decision by the management committee to terminate her membership.
The member claimed that she never received these emails and letters and upon arriving at the Club to play, was approached and told to leave (she didn’t). On returning home she had received two voice messages from the police advising her that if she set foot on the grounds again, she could be charged with trespassing.
She claimed that the purported decision to terminate her membership should be set aside because:
- she was not informed, or given any particulars, of the conduct that purportedly instigated the decision to terminate her membership prior to the termination;
- she was not given notice or an opportunity to respond as required by the constitution prior to the purported termination of her membership; and
- the purported termination of her membership was done unilaterally by the management committee with immediate effect, bypassing her right to a full and fair opportunity to present her case.
The Chief Justice noted that “the starting point is that the Club is bound by the rules of natural justice in adjudicating upon the rights of its members conferred by the rules of the Club and set out in its constitution.“
She went on to say:
“Given that the applicant did not receive notification of the management committee’s concerns, and therefore was not given any, let alone a “full and fair”, opportunity of presenting her case, before the decision was made to terminate her membership, the decision to do so is invalid, because of the failure to abide the rules of natural justice in this fundamental respect.“
The management committee’s decision to terminate the membership was held to be void and set aside. The decision is a blunt reminder that when instigating disciplinary proceedings:
- you must always follow the rules set out in your constitution and disciplinary by-laws;
- the member must be given full particulars of the allegations made against them;
- the member must be given a full and fair opportunity of presenting their case before any decision is made regarding the termination of their membership.
Failure to follow these essential steps may unnecessarily find your organisation before the Chief Justice in the Supreme Court or in the headlines of the Courier Mail, as it did in this case.
¹ O’Connell v Kawana Tennis Club Inc [2025] QSC 60
