ON 1 MARCH 2010, the NSW Surrogacy Act 2010 commenced.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/sa2010139
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Category Archives: Human Rights
Qarase v Bainimarama [2009] FJCA 67
ON THIS DAY in 2009, the Fiji Court of Appeal (Powell, Lloyd and Douglas JJA) delivered Qarase v Bainimarama [2009] FJCA 67; [2009] 3 LRC 614 (9 April 2009).
The Court of Appeal declared that the assumption of executive power by the President/military Commander (Bainimarama) and dismissal by him of the Prime Minister (Qarase) and parliament in the coup of 5 December 2006 was unlawful under the Fijian constitution.
On 10 April, Bainimarama abrogated the constitution.
Whilst the beaches remain beautiful and the people will always be warm and friendly, a dark cloud hangs over democracy and the rule of law in Fiji.
http://www.paclii.org/fj/cases/FJCA/2009/67.html
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
2004 | Human Rights Act
ON THIS DAY in 2004, the Human Rights Act 2004 (Act) commenced.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/act/consol_act/hra2004148
Bringing them Home: Stolen Children Report
ON 26 MAY 1997, the Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families (the Bringing them Home or Stolen Children report) was tabled in the Australian Parliament.
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/bringing-them-home-stolen-children-report-1997
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Euthanasia Laws Act 1997
ON THIS DAY in 1997 the Commonwealth parliament passed the Euthanasia Laws Act 1997 which overturned the Northern Territory legislation that legalised voluntary euthanasia for the terminally ill.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/num_act/ela1997161/
Copyright © 2014
Peter O’Grady
Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1995
ON 25 MAY 1995, the Northern Territory Parliament passed the Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1995.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nt/consol_act/rottia294
The Act, which took effect on 1 July 1996, legalised euthanasia in the Northern Territory until the Commonwealth Parliament subsequently enacted the Euthanasia Laws Act 1997.
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
1994 | End of apartheid
ON THIS DAY in 1994, South Africa’s Parliament elected Nelson Mandela as President, bringing to a close the apartheid era.
Coco v R
ON THIS DAY in 1994, the High Court of Australia delivered Coco v R [1994] HCA 15; (1994) 179 CLR 427; (1994) 120 ALR 415; (1994) Aust Torts Reports 81-270; (1994) 68 ALJR 401; (1994) 72 A Crim R 32 (13 April 1994).
The court restated the principle that it is presumed that parliament does not intend to limit fundamental rights, freedoms or immunities unless it does so in clear terms.
Per Mason CJ, Brennan, Gaudron and McHugh JJ:
“The courts should not impute to the legislature an intention to
interfere with fundamental rights. Such an intention must be clearly
manifested by unmistakable and unambiguous language.”
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1994/15.html
Peter O’Grady
Disability Discrimination Act 1993 (Cth)
ON 1 MARCH 1993, the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) commenced.
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Department of Health & Community Services v JWB & SMB (“Marion’s case”) [1992] HCA 15
ON 6 May 1992, the High Court of Australia delivered Department of Health & Community Services v JWB & SMB (“Marion’s Case”) [1992] HCA 15; (1992) 175 CLR 218 (6 May 1992).
“Children – Intellectual disability – Sterilization – Power of parents to consent – Assault – Parens patriae jurisdiction of court – Criminal Code Act 1983 (N.T.), ss 1, 26, 181, 187 188.
Family Law (Cth) – Family Court – Jurisdiction – Welfare – Parens patriae – Intellectually disabled child – Sterilization – Power of Court to authorize operation – Effect of authorization on criminal law – Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), ss. 63, 64, 64E – Criminal Code Act 1983 (N.T.), ss 1, 26, 181, 187, 188.”
The court held that the parents of a 14 year old mentally retarded girl from the Northern Territory could not lawfully authorize a sterilization procedure on their child without an order of a court.
The court held that the Family Court of Australia has the jurisdiction to authorize the carrying out of a sterilization procedure but could not approve consent being given to the parents unless the court authorizes the procedure.
Whilst parents or guardians may authorize or consent to the carrying out of a therapeutic treatment of their child, they have no such power regarding non-therapeutic treatment.
Sterilization of an intellectuallly disabled minor falls outside of the ordinary scope of parenal powers if the procedure is not obviously necessary.
Children have the right to personal integrity under domestic and international law. Procedures, such as sterilization, are “invasive, irreversible and major surgery”. It is up to the court, not the parents or guardians, to decide the appropriate circumstances that are in the best interests of the child.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1992/15.html
1300 00 2088
Legal Helpdesk Lawyers 