NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Larter v Hazzard [2022] NSWCA 238 Hearing dates: 26 July 2022 Date of orders: 22 November 2022 Decision date: 22 November 2022 Before: Brereton JA at [1]; Mitchelmore JA at [53]. Decision: (1) Grant the applicant an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal to the date on which the summons was filed; and (2) Refuse leave to appeal, with costs. Catchwords: HEALTH – Public Health – COVID-19 – Public health orders made under Public Health Act 2010 (NSW), s 7, requiring state-employed healthcare workers to be vaccinated by particular dates – Whether it was open to the Minister to make the orders having regard to the risk to public health – Whether order could have effect beyond 90-day limit imposed by statute – Whether orders inconsistent with International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Legislation Cited: Health Practitioner Regulation National Law 2009 (NSW), ss 20A, 150 Health Services Act 1997 (NSW) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Arts 12, 17, 18, 19, 26 Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW), s 32(2) Public Health Act 2010 (NSW), s 7 Public Health (COVID-19 Care Services) Order (No 2) 2022 (NSW) Public Health (COVID-19 Vaccination of Health Care Workers) Order 2021 (NSW) Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 101 Cases Cited: Attorney-General (NSW) v Quin (1990) 170 CLR 1; [1990] HCA 21 Baird v Glasgow Corporation [1936] AC 32 Brownells Limited v Ironmongers' Wages Board (1980) 81 CLR 108; [1950] HCA 3 Corporation of the City of Enfield v Development Assessment Commission (2000) 199 CLR 135; [2000] HCA 5 Jones v Metropolitan Meat Industries Board (1926) 37 CLR 252; [1925] HCA 54 Kassam v Hazzard; Henry v Hazzard [2021] NSWSC 1320; (2021) 393 ALR 664 Kassam v Hazzard; Henry v Hazzard (2012) 106 NSWLR 520; [2021] NSWCA 299 Kruse v Johnson [1898] 2 QB 91 Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li (2013) 249 CLR 332; [2013] HCA 18 Salt v Scott Hall [1903] 2 KB 245 Schofield v City of Moorabbin [1967] VR 22 Sharpe v Heywood [2013] NSWCA 192 Williams v Melbourne Corporation (1933) 49 CLR 142; [1933] HCA 56 Category: Principal judgment Parties: John Edward Larter (Applicant) The Hon Brad Hazzard MP, Minister for Health & Medical Research (First Respondent) Health Administration Corporation (Second Respondent) The State of New South Wales (Third Respondent) Representation: Counsel: S Prince SC with T Wong (Applicant) Submitting appearances (First and Second Respondents) T Prince with D Farinha (Third Respondent)
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