Filter
keyboard_arrow_upPalm Island alcohol restrictions are “special measures”
Maloney v The Queen [2013] HCA 28 (19 June 2013)The High Court has provided insight into the scope and operation of “special measures” under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) (RDA), holding that laws and regulations restricting the possession of alcohol on Palm Island were for the benefit of Aboriginal peoples. Contrary to statements of leading UN bodies such as the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (UN Committee) and the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Court has found that special measures do not require either consultation with or the informed consent of an affected community.
Read moreUK Supreme Court upholds legislative limitations on the right to a fair trial
Bank Mellat v Her Majesty's Treasury (No 1) [2013] UKSC 38 (19 June 2013)A narrow majority of the UK Supreme Court has ruled that it is entitled to consider "closed materials", being materials only available to one party to a proceeding, in certain cases arising under the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 (Act). The court, in coming to its decision, sought to balance the principles of open justice and a person's right to a fair trial with considerations of national security.
Read moreState responsibility under European Convention extends to soldiers serving overseas
Smith v The Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41 (19 June 2013)The UK Supreme Court has held that British servicemen who died during service in Iraq were within the jurisdiction of the UK for the purposes of article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Claims that the UK breached article 2 of the Convention by failing to implement a framework for protecting the lives of those servicemen were therefore not struck out by the Court. The Court, instead, required further facts to be examined and saved a determination on the issue for a later date.
Read moreFailure to take reasonable steps to promote representative jury a breach of the right to a fair hearing
R v Kokopenace, 2013 ONCA 389 (14 June 2013) (Ontario Court of Appeal)The Ontario Court of Appeal has held that the government of Ontario's failure to take adequate steps to promote the inclusion of Aboriginal on-reserve residents in a pool of potential jurors amounted to a violation of the right to a representative jury owed to a defendant in a criminal trial, a right protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Read moreHigh Court finds orders in excess of jurisdiction are valid until set aside
State of NSW v Kable [2013] HCA 26 (5 June 2013)The High Court has found that the State had detained Mr Kable with lawful authority, notwithstanding that the source of that lawful authority was subsequently struck down on constitutional grounds. As a result Mr Kable had no remedy in tort for unlawful detention, despite his detention subsequently being held to be unlawful.
Read moreSecurity concerns don’t trump basic procedural rights
ZZ v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EUECJ C-300/11 (04 June 2013)The Court of Justice of the European Communities (EU Court of Justice) has held that a person refused entry to an EU state on security grounds has a fundamental right to receive reasons for the decision. Notwithstanding security considerations, EU states have a core minimum obligation to provide enough information to enable the affected person to understand the basis of the decision and prepare a defence.
Read moreRight not to have home or privacy unlawfully or arbitrarily interfered with is not part of tribunal jurisdiction in eviction proceedings
Commissioner for Social Housing in the ACT & Massey (Residential Tenancies) [2013] ACAT 41 (4 June 2013)The ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (ACAT) has held that, when determining an application for termination of a public housing tenancy, ACAT’s jurisdiction to consider the human rights compliance of the public landlord is limited to ACAT’s exercise of discretion under the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (ACT) (RT Act).
Read moreCourt overturns male‒female binary understanding of sex, recognises sex may be non-specific
Norrie v NSW Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages [2013] NSWCA 145 (31 May 2013)The NSW Court of Appeal has recognised that “sex” can mean more than male and female, allowing for the legal recognition of individuals who identify as neither. Asked to interpret the word “sex” in the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1995 (NSW), the Court overturned a decision of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Appeals Panel ruling that, contrary to the Appeals Panel decision, it was open to the Registrar to register as person’s sex as “non-specific”.
Read moreHuman rights and gender equality and the limits of customary law on traditional polygamous marriages
Mayelane v Ngwenyama (CCT 57/12) [2013] ZACC 14 (30 May 2013)The Constitutional Court of South Africa has ruled that, in polygynous marriages (polygamy in which a man has more than one wife) under customary law, the first wife’s permission must be obtained before a second marriage can be entered into. The court drew on the Constitutional requirement that customary law be developed in line with Constitutional principles. As failure to obtain the first wife’s consent would breach the Constitutional principles of equality and inherent dignity of the person, such a requirement could legitimately be imposed upon customary law in South Africa.
Read moreFailure to protect against domestic violence amounts to gender-based discrimination and torture under European Convention
Eremia v Republic of Moldova [2013] ECHR, Application no. 3564/11 (28 May 2013)The Republic of Moldova’s failure to adequately protect a woman and her two daughters from her husband’s violent attacks amounted to a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. The European Court of Human Rights found Moldova’s inaction amounted to a violation of articles 3 (Torture and inhuman treatment), 8 (Private Life) and 14 (Discrimination).The case is an important development in the ways in which human rights can be used to tackle systemic issues of gender-based violence and gender discrimination.
Read moreWorking with children checks – assessing risk and balancing competing rights
ZZ v Secretary, Department of Justice [2013] VSC 267 (22 May 2013)The Victorian Supreme Court has upheld the appeals of a man who was refused an assessment notice and an accreditation that he needed to work as a bus driver. The court found that in assessing whether the man was “a risk” to children, rather than an “unjustifiable risk”, the VCAT had misapplied the statutory test. Justice Bell also found that VCAT failed to consider, among other things, the relevance of the applicant’s right to work in weighing up whether it was in the public interest for him to be given the required clearances.
Read moreExtradition while application to ECHR pending does not justify stay of proceedings
Mokbel v The Queen [2013] VSCA 118 (17 May 2013)The Victorian Court of Appeal has refused Antonios Sajih (Tony) Mokbel leave to appeal against a conviction and sentence relating to three serious drug offences. The Court upheld the decision at first instance that complaints about the conduct of Australian authorities (who accepted Mr Mokbel’s extradition whilst he had an application to the European Court of Human Rights on foot) fell far short of justifying a permanent stay of his criminal charges.
Read more