For many Australians it was an important test case, given concerns raised over mandated vaccination policies being implemented by both the NSW Government and, in some cases, by private businesses. Th. And an obligation of procedural fairness to certain individuals had not been breached, as when decisions are made that affect such large numbers of people no such obligation needs to be met. UNSW Law Professor George Williams has long argued the need for rights protections to be enacted at the federal level. So, its very difficult to argue the orders that were made are beyond power in the circumstances. 12th European Conference on Traumatic Stress - Academia.edu In making the health orders, the Minister: Keep up-to-date with our regular news and insights, Level 11 Waterfront Place 1 Eagle Street, Brisbane QLD 4000, Level 15 Olderfleet 477 Collins Street, Melbourne VIC 3000, Level 19 Angel Place 123 Pitt Street, Sydney NSW 2000. Get updates on Rebel News coverage in Australia delivered straight to your inbox so you never miss a story! Accordingly, Justice Adamson drew a distinction between the requirement for the Minister to consider "on reasonable grounds" that a situation has arisen that could become a risk to public health, and what Mr Larter alleged is a requirement that such order made by the Minister be reasonable. No. So, that itself is highly problematic: that you would have such extraordinary powers exercised without the protections needed to ensure that they are proportionate. One of the main grounds of challenges in both cases concerns the effect of the impugned orders on the rights and freedoms of those persons who choose to not be vaccinated especially their freedom or right to their own bodily integrity,. Kaur_Simar Jeet_s4538659_Admin Law_ Research Essay.docx Save pages and articles youre most interested in to read later on. October 15, 2021. This case is important to every state, please tune in at 4pm to watch LIVE. The Supreme Court has dismissed the proceedings in Kassam v Hazzard and Henry v Hazzard and has published its reasons. . Kassam; Henry v Hazzard has been dismissed on all challenges, with the court ruling in favour of the NSW Chief Health Officer. Your thoughts! Curtailing the free movement of persons including their movement to and at work are the very type of restrictions that the Public Health Act clearly authorises, Justice Beech-Jones found. Kassam Henry v Hazzard Ruling. - Constitution Watch So, they cant be conscripted, essentially. They are the sorts of powers that you expect to find in a dictatorship, not a country that values its democratic freedoms and ensures theyre respected. The Delta Order also prescribes that the workers concerned carry with them proof of their vaccination status. Video: Al-Munir Kassam v Bradley Ronald Hazzard, Directions Hearing of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, 3 September 2021 (start 11:12 mins) . In terms of the reasonableness of orders, especially those having a greater impact upon the unvaccinated, his Honour set out that if the laws differentiated on an arbitrary measures, like race or class, there would be an issue. Authors: Sally Moten, Partner and Jessica Miral, Lawyer. Deline & Kahlor, 2019 Planned Risk Information Avoidance | PDF - Scribd 2021/252587 . The highly contagious Delta variant of the COVID-19 virus entered NSW in mid-June. Australian Police & Local Govt Workers Legally Challenging Vax Mandates In Kassam v Hazzard and Henry v Hazzard. Justice Adamson ultimately found, upon the evidence presented by Dr Kerry Chant, the NSW Chief Health Officer, that it was open to the Minister to accept Dr Chant's advice regarding the public health risk of the COVID-19 virus and the necessity of vaccine mandates for health care workers, and to make the orders recommended by Dr Chant. In fact, a UN resolution called for it to happen. and directions made under the Public Health Act that interfere with freedom of movement, but differentiate between individuals on arbitrary grounds unrelated to the relevant risk to public health such as on the basis of race, gender, or the mere holding of a political opinion, would be at severe risk of being held as invalid and unreasonable. The health orders were challenged by several workers including one in construction, teaching, and healthcare who have all been required to receive a Covid19 vaccination. In response to the reliance by the plaintiffs on the dissenting judgement of Deputy President Dean in Jennifer Kimber v Sapphire Coast Community Aged Care [2021] FWCFB 6015, his Honour also noted that the function of determining the validity of the health order is for the court to discharge and the function of determining whether it should have been made is for the political process.7, One of the main grounds of challenge concerned the effect of the health orders on the rights and freedoms, especially in respect of the bodily integrity of persons choosing not to be vaccinated. The Minister for Health and Medical Research, Bradley Hazzard (, The health orders are either outside of the power conferred by the. Al-Munir Kassam v Bradley Ronald Hazzard (2021) and Natasha Henry v Brad Hazzard (2021) challenged the provisions of the Delta Order, one of which required a relevant care worker whose place of residence or place of work is in an area of concern "to have at least one (1) dose of a COVID-19 vaccine" or in its absence, to have "been issued with a medical contraindication certificate . Vaccine order really a movement law: judge | 7NEWS Natasha Henry and five other citizens have launched legal action against Health Minister Brad Hazzard in a bid to overturn rules requiring aged care workers to get the Covid-19 jab or face losing . Brad Hazzard MP, Minister for Health and Medical Research (2021/00259688). Kassam v Hazzard; Henry v Hazzard [2021] NSWSC 1320 . [66] First, the relevant parts of the decision relied on by the Henry plaintiffs do not address the case law concerning consent to a medical treatment.