Ms C Stewart v Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office: 2204590/2022. A senior UK government official turned whistleblower succeeded in a claim for unfair dismissal against her employer. 

The Game Meats Company of Australia attempted to stop Farm Transparency International Ltd from publishing a 14-minute video depicting alleged "extreme animal cruelty" obtained by a hidden camera.

The High Court on 11 September 2024 overturned a decision made by the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria regarding issues of criminal procedure. The issue of criminal procedure concerned a meeting between the complainant, the judge, and counsel for both the prosecution and the accused (the accused being the respondent to this appeal) on the day before the judge presided over a special hearing to take the evidence of the complainant.

The Victorian County Court has recognised invasion of privacy as an actionable right under Australian common law which allowed the plaintiff to obtain relief for harm caused by information disclosed but not otherwise captured by alternate causes of action.

Boyle v Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) [2024] SASCA 73 In the much publicised case of Australian Tax Office (ATO) whistleblower Richard Boyle, the South Australian Court of Appeal has found that the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 (Cth) (the Act) does not provide whistleblowers with immunity from criminal, civil or administrative liability for actions taken in gathering evidence to support public interest disclosures (PID). 

eSafety Commissioner v X Corp [2024] FCA 499The high-profile dispute between the Office of the eSafety (‘eSafety’) Commissioner and X Corp (formerly known as Twitter) has tested key powers of Australia’s Online Safety Act and stimulated spirited debate on the interplay between online safety laws and rights to freedom of expression. eSafety sought enforcement of a removal notice pertaining to a bundle of content showing the high-profile stabbing in Sydney of Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel. The Federal Court refused to extend an ex parte interim injunction against X Corp, and held that geo-blocking is a reasonable step for removing content pursuant to a removal notice under section 109 of the Online Safety Act. The judgment suggests Parliament should clarify the meaning of ‘all reasonable steps’ in the context of the Online Safety Act.

National Council for Civil Liberties v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] EWHC 1181In an important decision on protest rights in England, the High Court of Justice has found that amendments made by the Secretary of State to the Public Order Act 1986 (‘POA Act’) were unlawful. The amended regulations had the effect of lowering the threshold of police intervention in protests. In its decision, the Court considered four grounds of challenges and accepted two of them. The decision is useful in understanding what is considered to be unlawful and the limitations in circumventing legislative processes.

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. 

Ruddick v Commonwealth of Australia [2022] HCA 9Mr John Ruddick (the applicant) challenged the constitutional validity of recent amendments to the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth) (the Act) which limit registration of political parties whose name or logo contains a word in common with that of a previously registered political party.

Quirk v Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union [2021] FCA 1587A recent decision from Perram J of the Federal Court has confirmed that, in the absence of specific protections under whistleblowing laws, blowing the whistle to the media about wrongdoing at work is not a workplace right for the purpose of general protections in the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

Akers v Victoria Police (Review and Regulation) [2021] VCAT 1060A recent decision of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal confirms that there is no blanket exemption for surveillance documents under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic).

Cotterill v Romanes [2021] VSC 498On 17 August 2021, the Supreme Court of Victoria dismissed a challenge to the validity of the Victorian Government’s lockdown laws. Specifically, Niall JA held that measures to restrict movement in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 (Vic) and associated directions did not impermissibly burden the implied freedom of political communication.