Australia

Quinn v Overland [2010] FCA 799 (28 July 2010)

Application of the Charter to Public Sector Employment Decisions and Practices
Quinn v Overland [2010] FCA 799 (28 July 2010)
The Federal Court of Australia has found that there is a serious issue to be tried that s 20(3)(c) of the Public Administration Act 2004 (Vic) (‘the PA Act’) places a statutory duty on public sector employers [...]

R v Ashman [2010] ACTSC 45 (21 May 2010)

Right to Family and Protection of Children Relevant to Sentencing of Parent
R v Ashman [2010] ACTSC 45 (21 May 2010)
In this case, the ACT Supreme Court recognised that the right to family and the best interests of children under the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) may be relevant to the sentencing of a parent or [...]

Habib v Commonwealth of Australia [2010] FCAFC 12 (25 February 2010)

‘Act of State Doctrine’ does not Apply when Grave Violations of Human Rights Alleged: Court Agrees to Consider Australia’s Obligations to Citizens Abroad
Habib v Commonwealth of Australia [2010] FCAFC 12 (25 February 2010)
On 25 February 2010, the Full Court of the Federal Court delivered a significant judgment that will allow the Court to consider the [...]

Morro & Ahadizad v Australian Capital Territory [2009] ACTSC 118 (10 September 2009)

Right to Liberty and Redress for Unlawful Detention
Morro & Ahadizad v Australian Capital Territory [2009] ACTSC 118 (10 September 2009)
Gray J of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory found that s 18(7) of the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) (‘ACT Act’) creates an independent statutory right to compensation for unlawful arrest or detention.  [...]

Hakimi v Legal Aid Commission (ACT) [2009] ACTSC 48 (12 May 2009)

Right to Legal Aid and a Lawyer of One’s Choice
Hakimi v Legal Aid Commission (ACT) [2009] ACTSC 48 (12 May 2009)
The ACT Supreme Court has ruled that there is no absolute right for a legally aided person to choose their own lawyer.  This case was the first application made under amendments to the Human Rights [...]

R v Fearnside [2009] ACTCA 3 (24 February 2009)

ACT Court of Appeal Considers Human Rights Interpretative Principle
R v Fearnside [2009] ACTCA 3 (24 February 2009)
This case establishes the principle that the requirement, set out at s 30 the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT), to interpret laws compatibly with human rights, requires that laws be interpreted compatibly with human rights as reasonably limited under [...]

Andrew Casey v Richard Luke Alcock [2009] ACTCA 1 (23 January 2009)

Right to a Fair Hearing, Statutory Interpretation and Limitation Periods
Andrew Casey v Richard Luke Alcock [2009] ACTCA 1 (23 January 2009)
The ACT Court of Appeal has indicated that the UK’s Ghaidan approach to legislative construction – which allows a court to depart from the unambiguous meaning of the legislation where necessary to give effect to [...]

Raytheon Australia Pty Ltd & Ors v ACT Human Rights Commission [2008] ACTAAT 19 (24 July 2008)

The ACT Administrative Appeals Tribunal has considered the interpretative principle and permissible limitations on human rights under the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) in a case concerning exemptions from anti-discrimination legislation.
Detailed case note.

Capital Property Projects (ACT) Pty Ltd v ACTPLA [2008] ACTCA 9 (21 May 2008)

The ACT Court of Appeal has held that the obligation under s 30 of the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) to interpret laws compatibly with human rights may be engaged even where the words of a statute are clear and there is no ambiguity.  In particular, the Court held that a requirement that leave to [...]

R v DA [2008] ACTSC 26 (31 Mar 2008)

In an ex tempore judgment delivered by Higgins CJ, the ACT Supreme Court has stated that s 21 of the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) confers a positive right to a fair trial and thereby modifies the common law which merely provides for the right to be free from an unfair trial.
Detailed case note.

Commonwealth v Davis Samuel Pty Ltd [No 3] [2008] ACTSC 76

The ACT Supreme Court has missed an opportunity to consider the meaning of the right to a fair hearing in s 21(1) of the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) in the context of an application for adjournment of a civil matter based on reasons including lack of legal representation.
Detailed case note.