Thomson v ACT Planning and Land Authority [2009] ACAT 38 (2 October 2009) On 2 October 2009, the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (‘ACAT’) handed down a decision which discussed whether the limitation on ACAT’s jurisdiction to hear applications for review of planning decisions breached the right to a fair trial as protected under the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) (the ‘HRA’).  The Court held that the limitation on their jurisdiction was proportionate.

Victorian Electoral Commission (Anti-Discrimination Exemption) [2009] VCAT 2191 (30 September 2009) VCAT has granted the Victorian Electoral Commission ('VEC') an exemption from the Equal Opportunity Act 1995 (Vic) ('EO Act') to enable the VEC to take into account certain political activities of a person when considering whether to offer the person employment, contract work or an appointment on the audit committee of the VEC.  In arriving at her decision, Vice President Harbison referred to the principles enunciated by President Bell in Lifestyle Communities Ltd (No 3) [2009] VCAT 1869.

Lifestyle Communities Ltd (No 3) (Anti-discrimination) [2009] VCAT 1869 (22 September 2009) In September 2009, VCAT President Justice Kevin Bell dismissed an application by Lifestyle Communities Ltd for an exemption under the Equal Opportunity Act 1995 (Vic) (‘EOA’).  In making the orders, Bell P extensively considered the role of VCAT as a public authority and the operation of s 7(2) (limitations on human rights) and s 8 (right to equality and non-discrimination) of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic).

Dale v DPP [2009] VSCA 212 (21 September 2009) In considering whether a former police officer should be granted bail, the Court of Appeal accepted that the circumstances of his custody constituted 'exceptional circumstances' as defined by the Bail Act 1977 (Vic).  Unless the appellant was granted bail, he would likely be remanded into custody for over two years.  While in remand, the appellant was kept in solitary confinement for six months 'for his own protection' not because he was a risk to others.  As a result, he suffered mental illness.

McIntosh v Victoria Police [2009] VCAT 1868 (16 September 2009) In this case, Bell J held that the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic) should be interpreted consistently with the s 15 of the Charter, which recognises that the right to seek, receive and impart information is an aspect of the human right of freedom of expression. 

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.  On the facts before him, however, he found that the tort of false imprisonment provided a sufficient remedy and that additional public law compensation under the Human Rights Act was not necessary.

Materials Fabrication Pty Ltd v Baulderstone Pty Ltd [2009] VSC 405 (8 September 2009) On 8 September 2009, Vickery J of the Victorian Supreme Court handed down a decision which considered the right to commence a civil proceeding.  In the decision, Vickery J noted that the common law enshrines a right to commence legal proceedings and that this right is re-inforced by of s 24(1) of the Victorian Charter.  A dispute resolution clause in a commercial contract which aimed to limit parties’ access to the court was held inconsistent with this right and therefore invalid. 

Conroy v Yooralla Society of Victoria [2009] VCAT 1873 (7 September 2009) The Applicant, Mr Conroy had a physical disability and had lived in a community residential unit operated by the Respondent (Yooralla Society of Victoria) for 12 years before receiving two notices to vacate under the Disability Act 2008.  The first Notice alleged that the Applicant endangered the safety of other residents or staff; the second, that he caused serious disruption to the proper use and enjoyment of the premises by other residents.

Re an application under the Major Crime (Investigative Powers) Act 2004 [2009] VSC 381 (7 September 2009) In a landmark decision for the operation of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities, Warren CJ of the Supreme Court of Victoria, has found that a provision of the Major Crime (Investigative Powers) Act 2004 (Vic), which provides for the abrogation of the privilege against self-incrimination, must be interpreted as extending derivative use immunity to a person, so as to be compatible with human rights.

AB, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice & Anor [2009] EWHC 2220 (4 September 2009) In this case, the Administrative Court of the High Court of Justice held that the continued detention of a pre-operative transgender woman in a male prison breached her right to privacy under art 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

R v Kent [2009] VSC 375 (2 September 2009) On 2 September 2009, Bongiorno J of the Victorian Supreme Court handed down a decision which considered the application of the Charter to sentences of imprisonment imposed on individuals with mental health conditions. 

Secretary to the Department of Justice v AB [2009] VCC 1132 (28 August 2009) The Victorian County Court has handed down a decision which considers in some detail the application of the interpretative obligation in the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act.  Significantly, Judge Ross held that the proper construction of s 11 of the Serious Sex Offenders Monitoring Act 2005, as amended by legislation passed following the Court of Appeal’s decision in RJE v Secretary to the Department of Justice, was not compatible with human rights.