HRCN 2021

This case concerned a review of decisions of the District Court to refuse the Applicants (who were each defendants facing charges in that Court) access to counselling communications under section 14H of the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld). The Court considered that the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) did not apply and, even if it did, the judge would not have been required to adopt a different interpretation than what they had.

This was an appeal relating to a commercial dispute regarding refund fees for a pilot aptitude test: at [6]. The Tribunal ‘had in mind’ the right to a fair hearing both as a matter of procedural fairness and natural justice, and under section 31 of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld): at [98]. The requirement imposed by section 13 of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld), to only limit this right to the extent that is reasonably justifiable, was noted. However, there was no substantive discussion of human rights by the Tribunal.

This case concerned an application for bail, in which the applicant relied upon the right to liberty and security of person (section 29 of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld)). Specifically, the applicant’s argument rested on unreasonable delay in the circumstances of his case. The Queensland Court of Appeal accepted that, weighing the factors at play, the applicant’s risk of reoffending was ameliorated to an acceptable level and that his continued detention in custody was unjustified.

The case concerned an application for an exemption pertaining to mandatory
COVID-19 vaccination and mask requirements for police officers and certain staff members due to concern about a potential adverse reaction.

This case concerned an application for the appointment of the Office of the Public Guardian and the Public Trustee of the Queensland as guardian and administrator, respectively, for NHF, revoking a previous Enduring Power of Attorney.

The case concerned an application for a mining lease and environmental authority. There is considerable litigation history between the parties. This particular case was a remitted hearing following a decision of the High Court in February 2021.

This application concerned the appointment of a guardian and administrator for MXQ, the making of a confidentiality order, and the making of orders limiting information sharing with particular individuals.