The Supreme Court of the Northern Territory has upheld the right to liberty by excluding evidence of offences committed after a legal, but improper, arrest by police officers for drinking in a public place.
Read MoreLuke Geoffrey Batty (Luke) was killed by his father, Gregory Anderson (Mr Anderson), on 12 February 2014. An inquest was held into Luke’s death in late 2014. The inquest did not focus on the immediate cause of Luke’s death – this was plain on the facts. The State Coroner, Judge Gray, instead investigated the interactions that Luke and his mother (Ms Batty) had with the family violence system in Victoria in the 18 months prior to Luke’s death. Judge Gray found that no one person or organisation caused or directly contributed to Luke’s death. However, his Honour did recognise some systemic flaws and made a number of recommendations for improvement.
Read MoreOn 26 August 2015, Justice McDonald of the Victorian Supreme Court handed down judgement in a case concerning the local government’s duties to remedy harmful activities of anti-abortionists outside an East Melbourne fertility clinic. His Honour found that although the Melbourne City council (the council) has a duty to remedy nuisances under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 (Vic) (the Act) and that the anti-abortionists’ activities may constitute a nuisance, nonetheless in this case there had been no actual or constructive failure by the council to perform its duties under the Act.
Read MoreIn Inspector (Mahila) Ravina v Union of India, the High Court of Delhi held that the Central Reserve Police Force’s (CRPF) denial of promotion to a CRPF female inspector owing to her pregnancy violated the individual’s right to personal liberty and equality in matters of public employment under the Constitution of India (Constitution).
Read MoreOn 29 July 2015, the Court of Appeal, by majority, allowed an appeal by Nassir Bare against a decision of a single judge of the Supreme Court. The trial judge upheld the original decision of the Director (Director) of the Office of Police Integrity (OPI) not to investigate a complaint against a member of Victoria Police of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The Court of Appeal quashed the Decision and ordered the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) – which has since replaced the OPI – to reconsider Mr Bare's complaint in accordance with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Charter).
Read MoreThe US Court of Appeal held that it did not have jurisdiction under the Alien Tort Statute to hear the plaintiffs’ claim that Ford and IBM aided and abetted crimes committed against them during South African apartheid. The decision confirmed that the presumption against extraterritoriality will only be displaced where the relevant conduct touches and concerns the US and constitutes a violation (or aiding or abetting a violation) of customary international law. In order to demonstrate that a defendant has aided or abetted a violation the plaintiff must show that the defendant engaged in the conduct for that purpose.
Read MoreTo be covered by the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic) (the Act), members of the public alleging discrimination by police need to prove that the discrimination occurred in the provision of ‘goods and services’. A recent Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) decision clarifies the definition of ‘services’ in the Act as it relates to policing.
Read MoreThe recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Obergefell v Hodges is a landmark victory that activists have been working towards for over a decade. In a 5-4 judgment the Supreme Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution requires States of the United States to licence marriage equality.
Read MoreIn a landmark decision The Hague District Court, partly relying on human rights law, has ordered the Dutch Government to take more action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the Netherlands.
Read MoreThe European Court of Human Rights has concluded that Italy must provide legal recognition of same-sex couples. The ruling confirmed that Italy, by denying recognition to same-sex couples, was in violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which provides for the right to respect for privacy and family life.
Read MoreJustice Bergin, the Chief Judge in Equity in the NSW Supreme Court, found that a person not party to an adoption (in this case, a paternal grandmother) may have standing to enforce an adoption plan if the plan is registered under the Adoption Act 2000 (NSW) (Adoption Act), but not to review or amend it.
Read MoreThe European Court of Human Rights found that serious restrictions on a life prisoner’s family visits violated Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The restriction was non-rehabilitative in nature and its undifferentiated application to all life-sentence prisoners were disproportionate.
Read MoreThe Court of Appeal held that Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights (Convention) imposes a positive obligation on police to conduct a proper investigation into credible or arguable allegations of criminal conduct.
Read MoreIn June 2015, a jury unanimously found in favour of five plaintiffs who filed a suit claiming that counselling and therapy provided by JONAH (Jews Offering New Alternatives for Healing) contravened New Jersey consumer fraud legislation. The plaintiffs claimed that JONAH engaged in misrepresentations and unconscionable commercial practices by claiming that homosexuality was a mental disorder and that JONAH’s services could reduce or eliminate this disorder. A jury found unanimously in favour of the plaintiffs and awarded a total of US $72,400 in damages.
Read MoreThe Family Court of Australia has found that 15 year old “Jamie”, the subject of the often-cited decision of the Full Court of the Family Court in Re: Jamie [2013] FamCAFC 110 (Re Jamie 2013), was competent to consent to the stage two treatment for gender dysphoria and authorised her to make her own decision in relation to that treatment. This case is one of many being heard by the Family Court following the decision in Re Jamie 2013 that whilst court authorisation is unnecessary for stage one treatment for gender dysphoria, the nature of stage two treatment requires the Court to determine the child’s “Gillick competence” to make the decision.
Read MoreThe High Court of England and Wales has found that the “Fast Track” appeal process, which imposed extremely short timelines for hearing appeals against asylum seeker application decisions, was ultra vires, or beyond power, as a result of structural unfairness.
Read MoreThe UK Court of Protection was recently asked to rule whether the care regime of a 28-year-old man with severe autism ('Ben') amounted to a deprivation of liberty. Justice Mostyn ultimately concluded that the arrangements were in Ben's best interests, and did not amount to deprivation of liberty under Article 5 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). The Court declined to provide a test for 'deprivation of liberty' noting simply that the Court would 'know it when we see it'.
Read MoreA recent decision of the High Court of Australia allows the partial defence of provocation to be left to a jury in circumstances where the accused claims to have been provoked by a non-violent homosexual advance.
Read MoreFrench health policy imposes a life-time ban on blood donations from men who have sex with men. Asked to consider the legality of such a ban, the European Court of Justice held that the policy was discriminatory, but may be justifiable on the basis of public health. Whether it is justifiable will depend on the prevalence of HIV in the country and the availability of less onerous means of protecting blood supplies. The Court referred the matter back to the Administrative Tribunal for determination.
Read MoreThe recent decision of the Kenyan High Court in Eric Gitari v Non-Governmental Organisations Co-ordination Board & 4 Others [2015] eKLR is an important victory for the right to freedom of association, and for gay and lesbian people in Kenya. The decision is part of a broader trend of African-based LGBTIQ groups using the courts to protect human rights.
Read MoreIn R v Nguyen, the Court of Appeal for Ontario held that a rule which rendered spouses incompetent to testify against each other ("the spousal incompetency rule"), was discriminatory against unmarried couples (referred to as "common-law spouses" throughout the judgment). However, the Court declined to extend the rule on the basis that it was inconsistent with individual autonomy, dignity and self-worth.
Read MoreMorice v France, Application no. 29369/10, European Court of Human Rights, 23 April 2015
European Court of Human Rights has found that a lawyer convicted for instigating the public defamation of two judges was denied a fair hearing and that his conviction violated his right to freedom of expression.
Read MoreThe UK High Court of Justice has held that the right to have one's private life respected under article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) does not extend to the right of a transgender woman to amend her children’s birth certificates to reflect her transition.
Read MoreThe Ontario Court of Appeal in Canada has unanimously held that Toronto Police breached the appellant’s rights to freedom of expression and liberty during the 2010 G20 summit when preventing him from entering a certain part of the city after he did not consent to a search of his belongings. The Court found that such conduct was not authorised as a common law police power.
Read MoreThe United Kingdom Supreme Court has provided criteria for judging whether the living arrangements made for a person with a disability amount to a deprivation of liberty. If so, the deprivation must be authorised by a court or by the deprivation of liberty safeguards (DOLS) procedure in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (UK) (MCA) and subject to regular independent checks. In two cases heard together, the Court held that the appellants had each been deprived of their liberty.
Read MoreBy a majority of three to two, the UK Supreme Court held that the Benefit Cap (Housing Benefit) Regulations 2012 (UK), which limited the total amount of welfare payments a beneficiary may receive to an amount equal to the average earnings of working households, was valid despite having a discriminatory impact on women (in particular, single mothers). A different majority of three judges held that the cap breached the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), but only two of those judges found that this was relevant to the question of the discrimination against the mothers and meant that the cap was invalid. The decision reveals a significant range of views on the status and interpretation of the UNCRC in the UK.
Read MoreThe ACT Supreme Court has held that the Director-General did not breach the Corrections Management Act 2007 (ACT) (CM Act) and the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) (HR Act) for failing to provide a detainee with employment. It is a question of fact and degree in each case whether detainees' human rights require corrections authorities to provide them with employment opportunities.
Read MoreThe High Court of Australia has unanimously held that the Minister cannot refuse to grant a protection visa to an individual who has validly applied for a visa on the sole basis that the individual is an “unauthorised maritime arrival”. In this case, as the Minister had refused to grant a protection visa to the plaintiff on this basis, and therefore failed to consider the plaintiff's visa application according to law as he had been directed to do by the Court, the Court issued a writ of peremptory mandamus requiring the Minister to grant the plaintiff a protection visa.
Read MoreThe High Court of Australia has unanimously held that the Minister cannot refuse to grant a protection visa to an individual who has validly applied for a visa on the sole basis that the individual is an “unauthorised maritime arrival”. In this case, as the Minister had refused to grant a protection visa to the plaintiff on this basis, and therefore failed to consider the plaintiff's visa application according to law as he had been directed to do by the Court, the Court issued a writ of peremptory mandamus requiring the Minister to grant the plaintiff a protection visa.
Read MoreThe Canadian Supreme Court has unanimously overturned the prohibition on assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia contained in the Canadian Criminal Code. The Court found that the Code provisions infringe on the rights to life, liberty and security of the person, rights which are protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Read MoreThe United Kingdom Supreme Court has rejected a challenge to the long-standing rule that the police owe no duty of care in negligence in the context of protecting victims from potential future crimes.
Read MoreBy a narrow majority (4:3) the High Court found that the Australian Government’s detention of 157 asylum seekers for nearly a month on board a customs vessel was legal under Australian domestic law.
Read More