Austin Health v Tsikos [2023] VSCA 82On 17 April 2023, the Victorian Court of Appeal overruled the decision of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (‘VCAT’) in favour of the respondent, Ms Tsikos, and dismissed the appeal by Austin Health. Although the Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal, none of the grounds were successful, instead agreeing with the single instance judgment and finding that VCAT had erred in its original decision.

Murray v UBS Securities LLC, 601 US 22 (2024)This matter relates to a decision pursuant to §1514A(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 which allows whistleblower employees to seek relief against an employer that makes an adverse personnel decision against the employee because of their whistleblowing activity.The United States Supreme Court unanimously held that a whistleblower who invokes §1514A must prove that their protected activity was a contributing factor in the employer’s unfavourable personnel action but need not prove that their employer acted with “retaliatory intent”.

ECoCeQ v Minister for the Environment and Water (No 2) [2023] FCA 1208The Federal Court dismissed two judicial review proceedings brought by the by the Environment Council of Central Queensland (‘ECoCeQ’) regarding the climate change effects of scope 3 coal mining emissions to Matters of National Environmental Significance under the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (‘the Act’).

The Federal Court dismissed an application made by Save the Children Australia for habeas corpus of 34 women and children held in camps in North-East Syria finding that the Minister for Home Affairs and the Commonwealth of Australia did not have control over their detainment. However, the Court in a separate decision made no order as to costs, in an important decision on costs in public interest litigation. 

VZW Klimaatzaak v Kingdom of Belgium & Others (30 November 2023)In VZW Klimaatzaak v Kingdom of Belgium & Others (Klimaatzaak), the Brussels Court of Appeal ordered that Belgium and the Flemish and Brussels-Capital Regions reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 55 percent by 2030 compared to 1990 levels.

Kvelde v State of New South Wales [2023] NSWSC 1560Two environmental activists who challenged New South Wales’ recently reformed anti-protest laws have been in-part successful. The Supreme Court declared parts of section 214A of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) (Crimes Act) invalid for impermissibly burdening the Commonwealth Constitution’s implied freedom of political communication.

Young v Chief Executive Officer (Housing) [2023] HCA 31In the case of Young v Chief Executive Officer (Housing) [2023] HCA 31, the High Court allowed an appeal from the Court of Appeal of the Northern Territory Supreme Court, which concerned the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of the Northern Territory’s power under section 122 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1999 (NT) (Act).

MB (a pseudonym) v Children’s Court of Victoria & Anor [2023] VSC 666This case raises important human rights considerations of privacy and the State acting in the best interests of the child, in relation to the State’s retention of a child’s DNA information. Without the Victorian Charter, these fundamental considerations would not have been taken into account.

Children by Choice Association Incorporated [2023] QIRC 293A Queensland non-profit organisation has successfully applied to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission (the Commission) for an exemption to employ only women.

Kaplan v State of Victoria (No 8) [2023] FCA 1092In Kaplan v State of Victoria (No 8) [2023] FCA 1092 (14 September 2023), the State of Victoria was found vicariously liable for a school principal’s failure to adequately respond to antisemitic bullying by students.

Bespoke Development Group Pty Ltd v Merri-bek CC [2023] VCAT 758Victorian Tribunal refuses to strike out use of the Human Rights Charter ground in planning decision.

Annovazzi v State of New South Wales - Sydney Trains [2023] FedFamC2G 542On 23 June 2023, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (FCFCA) found that Sydney Trains had unlawfully discriminated against Ms Renee Annovazzi (Ms Annovazzi) by dismissing her, prohibiting her participation in the trainee drivers course and requesting a medical note regarding her disabilities.