The Court held it has no power to suspend the operation of mandatory vaccination directions made under s 200(1)(d) of the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 (Vic), as this would effectively suspend the operation of the statute itself. The Court found serious questions to be tried on whether the directions were incompatible with Charter rights to bodily integrity (s 10(c)) and privacy (s 13(a)), and whether they were made for an improper legislative purpose. However, the balance of convenience favoured refusing interlocutory relief given the public health emergency context.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 11 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 11 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.