Posts in Case Notes
The Federal Court dismisses judicial review challenges brought by the Environment Council of Central QLD Incs in relation to the Ministerial approvals for two coal mining expansion projects in NSW

ECoCeQ v Minister for the Environment and Water (No 2) [2023] FCA 1208

The Federal Court dismissed two judicial review proceedings brought by the by the Environment Council of Central Queensland (‘ECoCeQ’) regarding the climate change effects of scope 3 coal mining emissions to Matters of National Environmental Significance under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (‘the Act’).

Read More
Supreme Court of Victoria finds that random urine testing, and associated strip searches, are incompatible with human rights

Minogue v Thompson [2021] VSC 56 (16 February 2021)

The Victorian Supreme Court has found that whilst being held in prison, a person’s right to privacy and the right to be treated with dignity while deprived of liberty under the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) were violated when he was subjected to random drug and alcohol testing and a strip search before providing a urine sample for such testing. While Justice Richards found that Dr Minogue’s Charter rights were breached, Her Honour is yet to make orders on relief.

Read More
Cindy Miller inquest – summary of findings

Inquest into the death of Cindy Leigh Miller (COR 2018/1782)

On 22 January 2021, the Coroner handed down his findings in the inquest into the death of Ms Cindy Leigh Miller in the Coroner’s Court of Queensland.

Ms Miller died in custody at the Ipswich Watchhouse on 21 April 2018. Ms Miller’s cause of death was ‘mixed drug toxicity’. The Coroner found that it took police at the Watchhouse well over an hour to realise that Ms Miller was unresponsive.

Read More
US Supreme Court rules to reinstate in-person attendance requirements for abortion pill during Covid-19 pandemic

Food and Drug Administration v American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists 592 U.S.__ (2021)

A majority of the Supreme Court of the United States stayed an order by the District Court which suspended the requirement that people attend a hospital or clinic in-person in order to obtain mifepristone, a prescription drug used for medical abortions.

In July 2020, the District Court found that the in-person requirement posed an “undue burden” on people seeking an abortion in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Supreme Court’s decision reinstates the Food and Drug Administration’s requirement that patients attend a hospital, clinic, or medical office to pick up mifepristone and sign a disclosure form.

Read More
New Zealand High Court finds the voting age restriction a justified limit on protected rights

Make It 16 Incorporated v Attorney-General [2020] NZHC 2630

The New Zealand High Court upheld the minimum voting age at 18 years as a justified limit on the right to be free from discrimination on the basis of age. As the Court found the age to be within a range of reasonable alternatives, this decision deferred the question of whether the voting age should be lowered to Parliament to decide.

Read More
Victorian Supreme Court finds owners corporations must modify apartments for owners with a disability

Owners Corporation OC1-POS539033E v Black [2018] VSC 337 (21 June 2018)

The Supreme Court of Victoria has handed down a decision that owners corporations must undertake modification works to apartment buildings for owners and occupiers with a disability. The decision has been hailed as a significant win for people with a disability.

Read More
Inadequate Treatment and Restraint of Person with Schizophrenia a Violation of Prohibition on Torture

Kucheruk v Ukraine [2007] ECHR Application No 2570/04 (6 September 2007)

The applicant, a man with chronic schizophrenia, was convicted of theft and hooliganism.  The Ukraine Court suspended the criminal proceedings against him committing him first for psychiatric treatment.  He was subsequently detained in the medical wing of a pre-trial detention centre for a month before being transferred to a specialised facility.  While detained, he was subjected to the practices of restraint and seclusion.

Read More
The State Must Facilitate and Enable Freedom of Peaceful Assembly

Bukta v Hungary [2007] ECHR Application No 25691/04 (17 July 2007) Makhmudov v Russia [2007] ECHR Application No 35082/04 (26 July 2007)

The European Court of Human Rights has considered two cases in which it held that the relevant State party had interfered with the right to freedom of peaceful assembly in art 11 of the European Convention of Human Rights.  That right is protected by s 16(1) of the Victorian Charter.  In both cases, domestic law required that the authorities be informed in advance of any planned public assembly.

Read More
Strip Searching may Constitute Torture or other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Frerot v France [2007] ECHR Application No 70204/01 (12 June 2007)

In a judgment handed down on 12 June 2007, the European Court of Human Rights held that particular strip searches conducted on the applicant violated the prohibition on degrading treatment in art 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’).  Further, certain restrictions placed on the applicant’s correspondence violated the right to privacy protected by art 8 of the ECHR.

Read More
The Right to Freedom of Expression in a Commercial Context

Boehringer Ingelheim Limited & Ors v Vetplus Limited [2007] EWCA Civ 583 (20 June 2007) Canada (Attorney General) v JTI-Macdonald Corp 2007 SCC 30 (28 June 2007)

The scope and application of the right to freedom of expression in a commercial context has recently been considered by the UK Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada.  While neither court recognised a ‘corporate right’ to freedom of expression, both cases held that the right may be engaged by expression about commercial matters and, moreover, that the public have a prima facie right to ‘hear’ the expression (as opposed to a corporation having a right to ‘express’ the information).

Read More
Complaints of Ill-Treatment in Custody Must be Promptly Investigated and Plausibly Explained

Yilmaz v Turkey [2007] ECHR 17721/02 (5 June 2007)

The European Court of Human Rights has held that serious allegations of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment must be the subject of expeditious, effective and independent investigation. It has further held that evidence of ill-treatment, particularly of persons in custody, will give rise to a rebuttable presumption that the ill-treatment occurred and shift the burden to the state to provide a ‘plausible explanation’ as to the injuries.

Read More