29-10-25 / Mark Eade — Judicial Review & Administrative
Mark Eade appeared for the respondent, instructed by Hall & Wilcox. In summary, the applicant sought a statutory order of review in respect of a decision made by the respondent to reject an application for compensation under the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld) (rejection decision). The Court dismissed…
12-9-25 / Mark Eade — Human Rights & Discrimination
Mark Eade appeared for the second respondent, instructed by Crown Solicitor. The case dealt with an originating application seeking the principal relief of a declaration of incompatibility with human rights for ss 100 and 101 of the Domestic Violence and Family Protection Act 2012 (Qld) pursuant to s 53 of…
Knowles v Interprac Financial Planning Pty Ltd [2025] QSC 78
30-4-25 / Mark Eade — Corporations, Contract, Professional Negligence
Mark Eade (led by EJ Goodwin KC) appeared for the successful defendant, instructed by Lander & Rogers. The case concerned a written statement of advice provided by the respondent financial services business. The plaintiffs’ claimed to have suffered loss by reason of this allegedly negligent advice, and that the respondent…
Brisbane Airport Corporation Pty Ltd v Airservices Australia & Anor [2025] QSC 81
22-4-25 / Mark Eade, Chris Stackpoole — Contract, Planning & Environment, Professional Negligence
Mark Eade and Chris Stackpoole (led by L Kelly KC) represented the furst defendant, instructed by Maddocks. The case concerned an application by the first defendant for leave to file and serve two expert reports which it proposed to rely on at trial. Whilst the application for leave was not…
Stewart v Metro North Hospital and Health Service [No 2] [2024] QCA 247
6-12-24 / Mark Eade — Insurance
Mark Eade (led by C C Heyworth-Smith KC and K E Slack) represented the Respondent, instructed by Corrs Chambers Westgarth. The case involves a Calderbank offer made by Metro North Hospitals which was refused by Stewart on the basis that it was monetarily insufficient. The Court of Appeal held that…
