Bespoke Development Group Pty Ltd v Merri-bek CC [2023] VCAT 758Victorian Tribunal refuses to strike out use of the Human Rights Charter ground in planning decision.

Annovazzi v State of New South Wales - Sydney Trains [2023] FedFamC2G 542On 23 June 2023, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (FCFCA) found that Sydney Trains had unlawfully discriminated against Ms Renee Annovazzi (Ms Annovazzi) by dismissing her, prohibiting her participation in the trainee drivers course and requesting a medical note regarding her disabilities.

Waratah Coal Pty Ltd v Youth Verdict Ltd & Ors (No 6) [2022] QLC 21Waratah Coal Pty Ltd v Youth Verdict Ltd & Ors (No 6) [2022] QLC 21 (25 November 2022) involved the Land Court of Queensland making recommendations to the [Queensland] Minister for Resources (Minister) and the Chief Executive of the Department of Environment and Science (Chief Executive) on Waratah Coal Pty Ltd's (Waratah) applications for a mining lease and environmental authority to mine thermal coal in the Galilee Basin.

Halet v Luxembourg Application No.21884/18The applicant, Mr Raphael Halet, argued that his criminal convictions arising from disclosure of confidential corporate information constituted an infringement of Article 10 of the Convention, being his right to freedom of expression.

Unions NSW v New South Wales [2023] HCA 4 After “an urgent hearing of what became a non-urgent case”,1 the High Court found that a provision of NSW legislation did in fact burden the implied freedom of political communication. The High Court also determined that it did not have jurisdiction to hear or decide upon the validity of a repealed section of the same legislation, as it was no longer a sufficient “matter”.  

Boloh 1(A), Boloh 2(A) male only, Boloh 12 and Boloh 13 v The King and the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade [2023] FC 98 The Federal Court of Canada found that the Canadian government had violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by failing to take all reasonable steps to repatriate the applicants in this case, who were Canadian citizens imprisoned in northeastern Syria on suspicion of being involved with Daesh/ISIS.   

Pearson v Minister for Home Affairs [2022] FCAFC 203In an important judgment delivered on 22 December 2022, the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia (Allsop CJ, Rangiah and S Derrington JJ) found that an aggregate sentence of imprisonment did not constitute a single ‘term of imprisonment for 12 months or more,’ and therefore did not attract the operation of the mandatory visa cancellation powers at s 501(3A) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth).

Google LLC v Defteros [2022] HCABy a majority, the High Court of Australia has found Google not liable in defamation when it hyperlinked defamatory material on its search engine. In doing so, the Court found that Google had not acted as the publisher of that material. 

Views adopted by the Human Rights Committee under article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), concerning communication No. 3624/2019The United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC) concluded in September 2022 that Australia breached the rights of Torres Strait Islanders to enjoy their culture, and be free from arbitrary interferences with their private life, family, and home under (as enshrined in articles 27 and 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)).

Make It 16 Incorporated v Attorney-General [2022] NZSC 134  On appeal, the New Zealand Supreme Court has found that laws setting the voting age for New Zealanders at 18 are inconsistent with the right to freedom from discrimination on the basis of age, as set out in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZ) (Bill of Rights). Accordingly, a majority of the Court granted the appeal and made a declaration of inconsistency.

Deng v Australian Capital Territory (No 3) [2022] ACTSC 262Atem Deng (Deng) spent 58 days in custody and was released after charges were dismissed.

Farm Transparency International Ltd v New South Wales [2022] HCA 23The proceeding involved a challenge to the validity of the prohibitions in ss 11 and 12, in their operation with s 8, of the Surveillance Devices Act 2007 (NSW). It was held that the provisions were valid and did not place an unnecessary burden on the implied freedom of political communication.