Australia: Queensland Government Bulletin: In the media, in practice and courts, reports, cases and legislation

Last Updated: 29 November 2019
Article by Paul Venus and Suzy Cairney

In the media

Law Institute of Victoria calls for stamp duty reform to protect elder financial abuse victims
Victims of elder financial abuse should be protected from paying stamp duty on property transfers when they recover their stolen real estate, according to the Law Institute of Victoria (22 November 2019). More...

Replacement identity documents for people affected by bushfires
People who lose important identity documents in the bushfires can have them replaced for free to help them recover as quickly as possible, NSW Attorney General Mark Speakman and Minister for Customer Service Victor Dominello announced (22 November 2019). More...

Morrison Government continues trying to prevent sick people accessing Medevac process
The Full Bench of the Federal Court will today hear the Morrison Government's appeal from a Federal Court ruling that requires the Government to consider applications under the Medevac laws where doctors provide reports based on detailed medical records (21 November 2019). More...

Case of prisoner sentenced and jailed in secret prompts calls to reconsider law reform
The fluke public discovery of a man imprisoned in secret has prompted a call to revisit reform of secrecy law, almost 10 years since the last major inquiry occurred (21 November 2019). More...

Investigation into Aussie Farms
The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner is investigating Aussie Farms Inc under the Privacy Act 1988 The investigation follows preliminary inquiries into the collection of personal information by Aussie Farms and its notification practices (19 November 2019). More...

Media freedoms - striking a balance
The Law Council's Business Law Section hosted a Media and Communications Seminar in Sydney, which focused on the significant legal challengers in the ever-evolving regulatory landscape of the communications sector (21 November 2019). More...

Reconciliation action easy as ABC
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) has launched a new Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP) aimed at boosting Indigenous representation across its media platforms (21 November 2019). More...

PJCIS – press freedom inquiry reporting timeframe
The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) is busy finalising its consideration of the Inquiry into the impact of the exercise of law enforcement and intelligence powers on the freedom of the press. The Committee has written to the Attorney-General informing him of the later reporting requirement (21 November 2019). More...

Multispecies justice: A new approach to a growing environmental threat
Confronting another climate change summer of extremes, it's obvious the future of humans and the health of the environment are inextricably linked. New theories of justice must respond to this ecological entanglement (20 November 2019). More...

Chips cashed for gaming websites
The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has requested Australian internet service providers (ISPs) block two illegal offshore gambling websites. The ACMA move comes under the Government's new website blocking scheme (21 November 2019). More...

ACMA moves to block Emu Casino and Fair Go Casino
The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) will request Australian internet service providers (ISPs) block illegal offshore gambling websites Emu Casino and Fair Go Casino. The two sites will be the first blocked following ACMA investigations that found they offer online casino-style games which are prohibited under the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 (19 November 2019). More...

'A win for the people': Companies convicted over Hazelwood mine fire
Hazelwood Power Corporation failed to take key steps to avoid a coalmine fire that raged for 45 days, blanketing the local community in thick smoke and coal dust, a Supreme Court jury finds (20 November 2019). More...

Thousands of credit card insurance customers to get compensation payouts from NAB
The National Australia Bank agrees to pay compensation to tens of thousands of customers who were sold junk credit card and personal loan insurance in what is believed to be the largest class action settlement involving a big-four bank and its customers in Australian history (20 November 2019). More...

OIC Queensland: How will you deal with personal information in an emergency?
When it comes to extreme weather events in Queensland, it's not a matter of 'if' but 'when'. Bushfire season has started earlier than expected this year and conditions look set to continue if there is no significant rainfall (20 November 2019). More...

Emails suggest Tennis Australia director told executive Seven was 'safe' with Australian Open rights
Sensational emails emerge in a court case where ASIC is attempting to have media-buying mogul Harold Mitchell banned from managing corporations over allegations he stymied competitors to help Seven Network retain the Australian Open tennis rights without a competitive tender (19 November 2019). More...

QLD Human Rights Act to Fully Commence in January 2020
On 15 November, the remaining uncommenced provisions under the Human Rights Act 2019 (QLD) ('the HR Act') were commenced by proclamation. The provisions, primarily relating to obligations of public entities, are set to commence on 1 January 2020 (19 November 2019). More...

New Pro Bono platform to increase access to justice
The Andrews Labor Government is supporting the launch of a new online system that will improve access to legal representation for the state's most vulnerable and disadvantaged people. The new platform will allow courts to refer self-represented litigants to barristers for pro bono services (19 November 2019). More...

Robodebt under review
The government will no longer rely entirely on automated processes to chase welfare debt after a backdown on the controversial robodebt system. Critics say it resulted in errors, incorrect debts and unnecessary hardship for welfare recipients (19 November 2019). More...

Govt targets foreign interference on campus
Universities will have to inform the government of any identified risk of foreign interference under new guidelines developed across both sectors. Interference risks identified in the guidelines include cyber attacks; attempts to direct research; intellectual property theft and moves to steal away researchers and academic staff (18 November 2019). More...

Make your mark on graffiti laws
A review of NSW's graffiti laws is giving people across the State the opportunity to make their own mark in shaping these laws for the future (18 November 2019). More...

Deficiencies in Victoria Police review of Inflation night club shooting
Victoria's independent police oversight agency, IBAC, has found Victoria Police failed to properly examine and review police conduct following a critical incident at the Inflation nightclub in 2017, instead focusing on the actions of civilians and not police officers (14 November 2019). More...

New laws to modernise appeals in Victoria
New laws to modernise Victoria's criminal appeals system have passed Parliament, making appeal proceedings more efficient and reducing the burden on victims and witnesses (14 November 2019). More...

Highly regarded leader appointed new CEO of Victoria's anti-corruption commission
Victoria's independent anti-corruption commission, IBAC, announced that highly experienced public sector leader and legal practitioner Marlo Baragwanath has been appointed as its new CEO (12 November 2019). More...

Licensee fined $45,000 for 'comprehensive disregard' of Liquor Act
Phoenix Darts Australia Pty Ltd, trading as Phoenix Darts Bar, was found guilty of not complying with various obligations relating to unacceptable liquor service practices, having an approved manager present or available, operation and maintenance of CCTV, and engaging crowd controllers for the venue (11 November 2019). More...

In practice and courts

ACICA launch Australian Arbitration Survey
ACICAhas launched theAustralian Arbitration Surveyto gather empirical evidence from practitioners as what works in arbitration and what can be improved on. To take the survey it is necessary to first obtain a respondent number from ACICA. Details can be found here.

AHRC: Submission date extended for the National Conversation - have your say
The Australian Human Rights Commission has extended the date to hear from anyone on the key human rights priorities for Australia into the future. Submissions for the Free and Equal: An Australian conversation on human rights project will be kept open until 29 November 2019. More...

Current Consultations

Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee – November 2019
Impact of changes to service delivery models on the administration and running of Government programs
Nationhood, national identity and democracy
Native Title Legislation Amendment Bill 2019
Customs Amendment (Product Specific Rule Modernisation) Bill 2019 [Provisions]
Crimes Legislation Amendment (Sexual Crimes Against Children and Community Protection Measures) Bill 2019 [Provisions]

Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee
Federal Government's response to the drought, and the adequacy and appropriateness of policies and measures to support farmers, regional communities and the Australian economy

Community Affairs Legislation Committee
Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority Amendment (Sport Integrity Australia) Bill 2019

AAT Bulletin
The AAT Bulletin is a weekly publication containing a list of recent AAT decisions and information relating to appeals against AAT decisions, including immigration and citizenship
Issue No. 46/2019,18 November 2019. More...

Law Council of Australia: Submissions
13 November 2019— Law Council . More...

Inquiry into the impact of the exercise of law enforcement and intelligence powers on the freedom of the press
The inquiry was referred by the Attorney-General, The Hon Christian Porter MP who noted that the Government will consider proposals from media organisations and interested bodies which aim to ensure the right balance is struck between a free press and keeping Australians safe. For further information about the inquiry see the full terms of reference here. As agreed by the Attorney-General, the reporting date for this inquiry has beenextended to 28 November 2019

ANAO Performance audit in-progress: Defence's management of its public communications and media activities
Due to table: December 2019: The objective of this audit is to assess the effectiveness and appropriateness of the Department of Defence's (Defence's) management of its public communications and media activities. More...

What does open government mean to you: Open Government Partnership (OGP)
OGP is about governments and civil society groups committing to work together to make sure governments are transparent, responsive and accountable to the public Your input will help gain a better understanding of community attitudes to open government and inform the next OGP National Action Plan. More information is available on the Open Government Partnership Australia website. Complete the questionnaire here (12 November 2019).

Queensland

Requests for comment
QLS invites feedback on the below inquiries:
Queensland Law Reform Commission: Consent and mistake of fact review—Terms of Reference here.
Feedback welcome until Friday 29 November 2019.

CCC: Operation Impala commences - 11 November 2019
Operation Impala will examine the improper access and dissemination of confidential information by public sector agencies. More...

QAO: Have you considered physical security as part of your cyber security strategy
Entities need more than technical security controls to protect their data from cyber security risks (11 November 2019). More...

Where next for law reform? Final report launch
Australian Law Reform Commission - Speakers include Justice Sarah Derrington, President of the ALRC, and the Hon Michael Kirby, inaugural Chairman of the ALRC. The launch will be held at the Harry Gibbs Commonwealth Law Courts Building, North Quay, on 2 December 2019. More...

Published - articles, papers, reports

Maintaining trust in the Parliamentary process — PACs and Officers of the Parliament
ANAO: 22 November 2019
The Auditor-General, Grant Hehir, delivered a presentation to the 15th Biennial Australasian Council of Public Accounts Committees (ACPAC) Conference held at Parliament House, Canberra, on 7 November 2019. The presentation was titled Maintaining Trust in the Parliamentary Process — PACs and Officers of the Parliament. More...

Implementation of recommendations
ANAO: 14 November 2019
This edition of audit insights considers the approaches entities are taking to implement recommendations to improve public administration practices and outcomes. More...

19th Copyright Law and Practice Symposium 2019
Creativity. Innovation. Modernisation: 15 November 2019
The 2019 Symposium was a resounding success, with over 200 people attending over 2 days. More...

Deportation and sentencing: an emerging area of jurisprudence
Paul McGorrery; Sentencing Advisory Council (Vic): 19 November 2019
This report examines how sentencing courts deal with an offender's potential deportation from Australia. It summarises the ways that potential deportation can affect an offender's sentence. More...

Skewed priorities – comparing the growth of prison spending with police spending
Andrew Bushnell; Institute of Public Affairs: 19 November 2019
This report was originally released in June 2019. The author has released this updated version to correct some errors in the underlying data. More...

Evidence based policy research project: 20 case studies 2019
Matthew Lesh; Institute of Public Affairs: 15 November 2019
The aim of this project was to coax more evidence-based policy decisions by all tiers of government by reviewing and rating 20 high profile government decisions against the Wiltshire business case criteria. More...

Guidelines to counter foreign interference in the Australian university sector
University Foreign Interference Taskforce; Department of Education (Australia): 14 November 2019
These guidelines have been developed for, and in partnership with, the Australian university sector, to help manage and engage with risk to deepen resillience against foreign interference. They are designed to build on risk management policies and security practices already implemented by many Australian universities. More...

Cases

Estates 77 Pty Ltd v Minister for the Environment (No 2) [2019] FCA 1935
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – application of judicial review of a decision made under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act) – judicial review under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) and the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – whether the Minister for Environment made an error of law in considering the applicants' action a 'controlled action' – whether the applicants were exempt under s 43A of the EPBC Act
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW – EPBC Act – construction of s 43A – whether 'specific environmental authorisation' was given by a law of the State – consideration of Minister for Environment and Heritage v Greentree (No 2) [2004] FCA 741; (2004) 138 FCR 198 – endangered and vulnerable species of black cockatoo

Bailey v Repatriation Commission [2019] FCA 1840
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – veterans' entitlements – whether tribunal misapplied ss 120(3) of the Veterans' Entitlement Act 1986 (Cth) (VE Act) – Tribunal erred in finding material did not point to a hypothesis by weighing evidence
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – veterans' entitlements – whether Tribunal misapplied ss 196B(14) of the VE Act – whether 'but for' and 'operative cause' tests sufficient in circumstances – Tribunal erred
Veterans' Entitlement Act 1986 (Cth), ss 5C, 6-6F, 7, 9, 13, 120, 120A, 196B

Shafran v Repatriation Commission [2019] FCA 1833
DEFENCE AND WAR – veterans' entitlements – application for judicial review of conduct of the Veterans' Review Board –– whether the Secretary committed a jurisdictional error in providing the report to the Principal Member before giving it to the veteran for comment
STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – where s 137(1) of the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 (Cth) requires the Secretary to prepare a report – where s 137(4) requires the Secretary to provide the report, any comments on it made by the veteran and any supplementary report arising from any consequential investigation to the Principal Member of the Board as soon as practicable – whether the Secretary can only send the relevant documents to the Board once the time for comment and any consequential investigation has ended – whether it is a jurisdictional error for the Secretary to send the documents to the Principal Member before providing it to the veteran
STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – where s 137(3) requires the Secretary to give the veteran 28 days on which to comment on the report or such longer time as is requested – where s 137(3) does not expressly provide for approval of the extension or how long it may be for – whether there is an implied reasonableness restriction on the veteran's rights to request an extension under s 137(3) – whether the Secretary has the power to grant or refuse an extension request under s 137(3) – whether the request must be made to the Secretary – whether the Board has jurisdiction to make directions regarding a request for an extension of time to comment under s 137(3)

'RJ' and Australian Federal Police (Freedom of information) [2019] AICmr 72
Freedom of Information — Whether disclosure would have a substantial adverse effect on the management or assessment of personnel — Whether contrary to the public interest to release conditionally exempt documents — (CTH) Freedom of Information Act 1982 ss 11A(5) and 47E(c).

'RI' and Department of Home Affairs (Freedom of information) [2019] AICmr 71
Freedom of Information — Whether disclosure would prejudice lawful methods or procedures — Whether disclosure would have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of an agency — Whether disclosure is contrary to the public interest — (CTH) Freedom of Information Act 1982 ss 11A, 37(2)(b) and 47E(d)

Justin Warren and Services Australia (Freedom of information) [2019] AICmr 70
Freedom of Information — Whether documents brought into existence for the dominant purpose of briefing a Minister on a Cabinet document — Whether disclosure would prejudice lawful methods or procedures — Whether document contains deliberative matter prepared for a deliberative process — Whether disclosure would have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of an agency — Whether contrary to public interest to release conditionally exempt documents — (CTH) Freedom of Information Act 1982 ss 11A(5), 34(1)(c), 37(2)(b), 47C and 47E(d)

Van Dieren and Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2019] AATA 4777
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for stay of decision under s 41(2) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 – relevant considerations – prospects of success – consequences for the Applicant of a refusal of stay – public interest – consequences for the Respondent in carrying out its functions – whether the application for review would be rendered nugatory – stay application refused – Tribunal does not have power to order any stay on publication by way of a media release where there has not been a stay granted – order that the hearing of the application be expedited
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) – ss 41, 41(2); Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth) – s 1(2); Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – ss 670A(1), 760A, 920A, 920A(1), 1041H(1)

Frugtniet v Tax Practitioners Board [2019] FCAFC 193
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Appeal from Federal Court decision dismissing appeal under s 44 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) against Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) decision – where no further hearing held after reconstituting the AAT – where AAT affirmed Tax Practitioners Board decision terminating the appellant's registration as a tax agent under ss 40-5(1)(b), Tax Agent Services Act 2009 (Cth), on the ground it was not satisfied he was a fit and proper person – whether AAT breached procedural fairness including by reason of delay or the failure by the reconstituted Tribunal to hold a further hearing – whether AAT erred in having regard to certain evidence of conduct in court and other tribunal proceedings – whether AAT erred in having regard to a witness statement where the witness was not called – whether AAT had jurisdiction to determine the validity of the Board's decision – where only a court may authoritatively determine whether an administrative body has acted within jurisdiction – where AAT's decision effectively overtook any jurisdictional error in the Board's decision – appeal dismissed

The Wilderness Society (Tasmania) Inc v Minister for the Environment [2019] FCA 1842
ENVIRONMENT LAW – application for judicial review of a referral decision made under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) – where a delegate of the Minister decided under s 75 of the Act that the proposed action was not a "controlled action" – where delegate adopted Departmental brief as reasons for decision – whether delegate's decision involved an error of law or misdirection due to erroneous view of Act's requirements, including task under s 75 – where delegate relied on assessment of proposed action conducted by the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service under the "Reserve Activity Assessment" (RAA) process – where delegate took into account mitigation and avoidance measures proposed by proponent under RAA process in deciding action was not a "controlled action" – whether non-compliance with s 77A of the Act – whether delegate was required to consider whether to exercise power in s 74A of the Act before making decision under s 75 – application allowed

Da Silva v Building Professionals Board [2019] NSWCATOD 177
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW – accredited certifier – whether construction certificate plans inconsistent with development consent – whether development consent authorised variations – finding of unsatisfactory professional conduct – appropriate penalty

Wilson v Brisbane; Wilson v Chan & Naylor Parramatta Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 1598
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Judicial review – Civil and Administrative Tribunal of NSW – Decisions of an Appeal Panel and Senior Member of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal – Refusal to conduct judicial review under s 34 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Civil procedure – Application for leave to appeal from the decisions of an Appeal Panel and Senior Member of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal as to costs – Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), s 83 – Appeal on a question of law – Where the decision of the Senior Member does not involve an "external or internal appeal" – Inappropriate exercise of discretion – Failure to provide adequate reasons – Failure to afford procedural fairness

Council of the City of Ryde v Azizi [2019] NSWSC 1605
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – jurisdictional error – judicial review of Determinations of Compensation issued by the Valuer-General under s 47 of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW) – whether the Determinations with respect to underlying zoning and development standards lacked probative evidence and were legally unreasonable – whether the Determinations with respect to the comparable sales method of valuation were legally unreasonable – not legally unreasonable – impermissible merits review – no jurisdictional error ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – jurisdictional error – whether there was power to award certain disturbance costs under s 59(1)(a) of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW) – where the Valuer-General misdirected himself to the date from which disturbance costs were claimable in accordance with Hoy v Coffs Harbour City Council [2016] NSWCA 257 – whether the legal error made by the Valuer-General in making the Determinations has the consequence that the Determinations are liable to be set aside for jurisdictional error – jurisdictional error – Determinations set aside – declaration made CIVIL PROCEDURE – stay – orders made by consent staying the legal effect of the Valuer-General's Determinations until the final disposition of the proceedings – whether the Court can stay the operation of an Act COSTS – party/party – issues severable – first and second defendants successful on 70 per cent of issues in the case – plaintiff to pay 30 per cent of the first and second defendants' costs

Ashworth v Terrill [2019] NSWSC 1596
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – procedural fairness – notice not given by Registrar General when primary application made by neighbour to bring land under Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) – relief granted

CJU v Northern Sydney Local Health District [2019] NSWCATAD 236
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – privacy – whether an application for internal review has been made – whether the alleged conduct is established – alleged disclosure and use of personal information –- alleged disclosure to legal representative and employee - judicial functions exemption.

Sneesby v Shoalhaven City Council [2019] NSWCATAD 234
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION - consultation with third parties – personal information – prejudice to court proceedings or right to procedural fairness.

Insurance Australia Ltd t/as NRMA Insurance v Gurbuz Aslan [2019] NSWSC 1587
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — Judicial Review — Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW) s 92(1)(b) — Where plaintiff sought that the claim be exempt from informal assessment process on the grounds that it was not suitable due to the first defendant's false and misleading statements — Whether there was error of law or jurisdictional error on the part of the assessor — Whether the assessor asked the correct question — Errors established — Matter remitted for determination according to law

Wagner & Ors v Nine Network Australia & Ors [2019] QSC 284
DEFAMATION – DAMAGES – GENERAL DAMAGES – ASSESSMENT – IN GENERAL – where a jury found that a 60 Minutes program imputed that the plaintiffs caused a man-made disaster and that the disaster was the result of their failing to take steps that they should have to prevent a quarry wall on property they owned from collapsing, causing a devastating wall of water to destroy Grantham and kill twelve people – where the jury found that the sixth defendant, an experienced journalist who featured in the program, conveyed a similar imputation by his words – where the program also was found to impute that the plaintiffs sought to conceal the truth about the role their quarry played in the flood and that the plaintiffs disgracefully refused to answer to the public for their failure to take steps to prevent the quarry wall they owned from collapsing and causing the flood – what award of damages should be given to each plaintiff against the Nine Network defendants and against Mr Cater
DEFAMATION – DAMAGES – GENERAL DAMAGES - ASSESSMENT – SPECIAL MATTERS – AGGRAVATION – CONDUCT OF THE PARTIES – where the plaintiffs claim aggravated compensatory damages on the basis that the defendants engaged in conduct that was improper, unjustifiable or lacking in bona fides – where the defendants made inadequate attempts to ascertain the truth – where the defendants possessed information which contradicted allegations in the program but did not report it – where the defendants made belated attempts to seek a response from the plaintiffs and did not include in the program any part of a statement issued by the plaintiffs – where, despite the findings of a Commission of Inquiry which in October 2015 discredited the allegations in the program, the defendants pleaded a defence of justification for seven months, withdrawing it in November 2018 – where the defendants have failed to broadcast a correction, retraction or apology in the years following the program – whether the defendants engaged in conduct which was improper, unjustifiable or lacking in bona fides – whether there should be awards of aggravated compensatory damages against the Nine Network defendants and against Mr Cater
DEFAMATION – DAMAGES – GENERAL DAMAGES – ASSESSMENT – SPECIAL MATTERS – MITIGATION – where in September 2018 the plaintiffs received large awards of damages for numerous defamations, including substantially similar imputations, broadcast on a radio show – whether the previous awards and any public vindication achieved by reporting that decision should mitigate damages, and the extent of any such mitigation

Meissner v Commissioner for Liquor and Gaming & Anor [2019] QCAT 338
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – where related proceeding in Planning and Environment Court – whether review proceeding should await outcome of Court proceeding
GAMING AND LIQUOR – ADMINISTRATION – LIQUOR LICENSING – LICENSING TRIBUNALS GENERALLY – REVIEWS, APPEALS AND CASES STATED – GENERALLY – where objector seeks to lead new evidence – whether tribunal can receive evidence that came into existence after reviewable decision made
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 3(b)

Body Corporate for Holland Park View Apartments v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2019] QCAT 334
The decision of the Commission given on 24 May 2018 is confirmed
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS – QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL – general administrative review – direction to rectify – where a body corporate complained about defective work – where the Commission found building work was not defective and refused to direct rectification – where the work complied with statutory requirements – where the body corporate maintained the work did not comply with the contract – whether failure to comply with the contract amounted to defective building work
Statutory Instruments Act 1992 (Qld), s 7(3)

Pivovarova v Michelsen [2019] QCA 256
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – STATUTORY APPEALS FROM ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITIES TO COURTS – where applicant seeks leave to appeal a decision of the appeal tribunal of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal – where s 150(3)(a) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) provides that an appeal may be made "only on a question of law" – whether the grounds of the proposed appeal raised by the applicant are limited to questions of law – whether the Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine the proposed appeal

Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 Cth s 44; Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 Qld s 142, s 149, s 150, s 153; Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 Qld r 765(1)

PRS v Crime and Corruption Commission [2019] QCA 255
APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL - GENERAL PRINCIPLES – INTERFERENCE WITH DISCRETION OF COURT BELOW – IN GENERAL – OTHER MATTERS – where the appellant in the first instance applied for injunctive relief against the respondent – where the application arose out of an investigation into alleged corrupt conduct by a person (ABC) who held an appointment in a unit of public administration – where an investigation by the respondent concerned dealings between the appellant and ABC – where the application in the first instance was dismissed – where the appellant seeks to appeal the decision to dismiss the application – where fourteen grounds of appeal were initially articulated in the amended notice to appeal, but were subsequently grouped into six grounds – where it is contended that the court erred in failing to order the respondent to provide disclosure of documents – where it is contended that the court erred in failing to allow the appellant leave to amend the orders sought – where it is submitted that the court erred in finding that the investigation had concluded at the relevant time and that the court therefore had no power to grant injunctive relief pursuant to s 332 of the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld) – where it is argued that the court erred in finding that a police officer seconded by the respondent had the power to charge the appellant in relation to a corruption offence – where it is submitted that the court erred in finding that it should not embark upon a consideration of the appellant's complaint as to unfairness – whether the learned primary judge erred in the first instance pursuant any of to the appealed grounds
STATUTES – ACTS OF PARLIAMENT – INTERPRETATION – INTERPRETATION ACTS AND PROVISIONS – EXERCISE OF POWERS AND DUTIES – GENERALLY – where the learned primary judge concluded that the investigation of the respondent had concluded and the court therefore had no power to grant injunctive relief pursuant to s 332 of the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld) – where the appellant argues that for the purposes of s 332 the relevant time for deciding whether an investigation is on foot or not is the time at which a person "claims" one of the two bases under s 332(1) Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld) – where it is contended that the interpretation of the s 332 of the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld) permitted the circumvention of the of that section by the respondent – where it is contended that a police officer that was seconded by the respondent was not able to exercise the powers of an arresting or charging officer into the conduct of a person called to give evidence before the respondent as an officer not seconded by the respondent might – where it is contended that the seconded officer could not be in a position to determine that any charge should be laid against the appellant as the officer could not form a "reasonable suspicion" divorced from consideration of privileged material – where it is submitted that the preservation of police powers under s 255(5) of the Crime and Corruption Act 2001 (Qld) should be read subject to a limitation – whether the learned primary judge erred in his interpretation that the court had no power to grant injunctive relief – whether the learned primary judge erred in concluding that the investigation was complete – whether the learned primary judge erred in finding that the officer seconded by the respondent had the power to charge the appellant in relation to a corruption offence.Crime and Corruption Act 2001 Qld s 197(7), s 255(5), s 332

Lowis v Queensland Industrial Relations Commission [2019] QSC 277
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – JUDICIAL REVIEW – REVIEWABLE DECISIONS AND CONDUCT – GENERALLY – where respondent convened hearing for the purpose of the applicant objecting to the discontinuance of his employer's appeal – where applicant applied to become a party to the appeal during hearing – where respondent refused application and discontinued the appeal – where applicant seeks judicial review of the decision to refuse the applicant becoming a party to the appeal – where respondent contends that no such decision was made as the respondent instead rejected the applicant's objection to the discontinuance of the appeal – whether the decision is a decision of an administrative character - whether provision is made by a law under which the applicant is entitled to seek a review of the matter
Judicial Review Act 1991 Qld s 20, s 12, s 13; Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 Qld s 549, s 51, s 57, s 550, s 553, s 554, s 557, s 558, s 559, s 560, s 561, s 562

Kinchington Estate Pty Ltd v Wodonga City Council [2019] VSC 745
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Judicial review – Order 56 – Agreement under s 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic) – Applications by registered proprietor to amend s 173 agreement – Council refusal to agree in principle to s 173 amendment applications – Refusal by Council to furnish statement of reasons – Whether Council was acting as a 'tribunal' when decisions were made – Definition of 'tribunal' considered – Procedural fairness – No 2 Pitt Street Pty Ltd v Wodonga City Council (No 3) [1999] 3 VR 439; Muldoon v Melbourne City Council [2013] FCA 994; (2013) 217 FCR 450 referred to and applied – Administrative Law Act 1978 (Vic) ss 2, 8(1) – Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic) ss 177, 178A, 178B, 178C-178I.

LJU v Hoffman (Human Rights) (Corrected) [2019] VCAT 1429
Health Records Act 2001 section 18 - Health Privacy Principles – whether a health practitioner has breached the Health Records Act 2001 section 18 and Health Privacy Principles 2, 3 and 4.
The complaints in relation to the breaches of Health Privacy Principles 2, 3 and 4 are proven.
David Hoffman to pay to LJU the sum of $39,420.00.

Wellington v Surf Coast Shire (Review and Regulation) [2019] VCAT 1811
Freedom of Information Act 1982 – email provided to municipal councillors and officers by applicant in support of planning permit application – whether exempt as personal information or information received in confidence –ss 33, 35(1)(a) (invoking s 30), 35(1)(b).

Legislation

Commonwealth

Regulations

National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Amendment (2019 Measures No. 1) Rules 2019
21/11/2019 - This instrument amends the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Rules 2018 to exclude eight Queensland grammar schools from the definition of 'State institution' under the National Redress Scheme for Institutional Child Sexual Abuse Act 2018 (the Act) and to prescribe various Queensland, New South Wales and Victorian laws for the purposes of section 27 of the Act.

Social Security (Declared Overseas Terrorist Act—Christchurch 2019) Declaration 2019
18/11/2019 - This instrument declares the 15 March 2019 attacks in Christchurch as a 'declared overseas terrorist act' for the purposes of the Australian Victim of Terrorism Overseas Payment Scheme.

Social Security (Declared Overseas Terrorist Act) Declaration 2019—Karachi 2002
18/11/2019 - This instrument declares the 8 May 2002 attacks in Karachi as a 'declared overseas terrorist act' for the purposes of the Australian Victim of Terrorism Overseas Payment Scheme.

ASIC Corporations (Whistleblower Policies) Instrument 2019/1146
14/11/2019 - This instrument provides relief to public companies limited by guarantee that operate on a not-for-profit basis and have annual consolidated revenue of less than $1 million from the requirement to have a whistleblower policy under s1317AI(1) of the Corporations Act 2001.
AusCheck (Major National Event—International Cricket Council T20 World Cup Australia 2020) Declaration 2019
11/11/2019 - This instrument enables AusCheck to conduct and coordinate background checks in connection with the accreditation of individuals who are working or volunteering at the T20WC.

Queensland

Subordinate legislation as made – 15 November 2019
No 224 Proclamation No. 2—Human Rights Act 2019 (commencing remaining provisions)
This Proclamation fixes 1 January 2020 for the commencement of the provisions of the Human Rights Act that are not in force.

Bills Updated
Child Death Review Legislation Amendment Bill
Introduced by: Hon Y D'Ath MP on 18/09/2019
Stage reached: 2nd reading to be moved on 18/11/2019

Subordinate legislation as made – 22 November 2019
No 231 Gaming Machine (Approved Financiers) Amendment Regulation 2019

This publication does not deal with every important topic or change in law and is not intended to be relied upon as a substitute for legal or other advice that may be relevant to the reader's specific circumstances. If you have found this publication of interest and would like to know more or wish to obtain legal advice relevant to your circumstances please contact one of the named individuals listed.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions