Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Bannister v State of Victoria [2012] FCA 1341 Citation: Bannister v State of Victoria [2012] FCA 1341
Parties: DANIEL BANNISTER v STATE OF VICTORIA
File number: VID 254 of 2011
Judge: MURPHY J
Date of judgment: 27 November 2012
Catchwords: HUMAN RIGHTS – discrimination – minor with intellectual disabilities – claim of discrimination – application by litigation representative for approval of settlement – requirement that application be accompanied by an opinion of an independent lawyer – meaning of independent lawyer – settlement approved
Legislation: Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)
Cases cited: Wade v State of Victoria (No 2) [2012] FCA 1080
Date of hearing: 27 November 2012
Place: Melbourne
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 12
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr D Hancock
Solicitor for the Respondent: Ms R Nicolson of Allens Arthur Robinson
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION VID 254 of 2011
BETWEEN: DANIEL BANNISTER
Applicant
AND: STATE OF VICTORIA
Respondent
JUDGE: MURPHY J DATE OF ORDER: 27 NOVEMBER 2012 WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The settlement between the parties recorded in the Settlement Deed dated 25 October 2011, which is exhibit "LB-3" of the affidavit of Lucy Bannister sworn 22 November 2012 ("the Bannister affidavit"), is approved. 2. The settlement monies are to be paid into a trust to be created named the Daniel Bannister Trust as set out in exhibit "LB-5" to the Bannister affidavit, to be administered pursuant to that trust. 3. The opinion of independent lawyer David Hancock dated 22 November 2012 which is exhibit "LB-4" to the Bannister affidavit be treated on a confidential basis by being placed in a sealed envelope marked "NOT TO BE OPENED WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF A JUSTICE OF THIS COURT". 4. The proceeding be dismissed with no order as to costs. Note: Settlement of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate