Posts in Case Notes s07 - Limitations on Human Rights
Supreme Court of Victoria dismisses challenge to Melbourne curfew

Loielo v Giles [2020] VSC 722

On 2 November 2020, the Supreme Court of Victoria dismissed the first substantive legal challenge to the validity of greater Melbourne’s lockdown laws. Justice Ginnane held that the curfew imposed between 9pm and 5am in greater Melbourne from 13 to 28 September 2020 (Curfew) was a lawful and proportionate measure in response to mounting cases of COVID-19 in Victoria.

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
New Zealand High Court finds COVID-19 lockdown measures to be justified under human rights law (but partially unlawful on other grounds)

Andrew Borrowdale v Director-General of Health and Attorney-General [2020] NZHC 2090

A Full Bench (three Judges) of the New Zealand High Court unanimously held that the restrictions imposed by the New Zealand Government in response to the COVID-19 pandemic requiring New Zealanders to stay at home were consistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA). The Court also held, however, that some public statements went beyond what the orders then permitted and some restrictions were therefore, for a limited time, unlawful.

Read More