Event and Time
Event Description
- Acting Commissioner of the Queensland Ambulance Service mandated COVID-19 vaccinations.
- Applicants challenged the decision under the Judicial Review Act.
- The initial directive was revoked and replaced by a new directive shortly before the hearing.
- The trial was postponed at the commencement, leading to discussions about costs.
Application and Claims
- The primary application was filed on 27 September 2021 against the Chief Executive of Queensland Health for mandating vaccinations.
- The Sixth Applicant (a nurse) sought a leave to adjourn her application due to the directive's revocation, which was refused.
- The Sixth Applicant later sought leave to discontinue her proceedings, which was granted.
Judicial Decisions
- No orders for costs concerning the adjourned hearing on 14 February 2022.
- The Sixth Applicant and the respondent to bear their own costs for the entire proceeding.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Applicants' Claims:
- Argued the vaccination directives were unlawful under the Judicial Review Act. - Evidence and argument shifts were necessary due to the new directive amidst changing pandemic circumstances.
- First Respondent's Counterarguments:
- Sought costs as the hearing was adjourned due to the applicants' failure to adapt to the new directive swiftly. - Contended the adjournment was unnecessary for the Sixth Applicant as her directive had not changed.
- Legal Basis:
- The applicants relied primarily on the Human Rights Act alongside the Judicial Review Act, citing public interest and legal precedents regarding costs. - The Sixth Applicant also referenced the costs provisions under the Judicial Review Act that allow for each party to bear their costs, specific to their case circumstances.