Sea Swift Pty Ltd v Torres Strait Island Regional Council [2023] QSC 203
4-9-23 / Sarah Spottiswood — Judicial Review & Administrative
The applicant (Sea Swift) is an Australian shipping company that ships cargo throughout Northern Queensland and the Northern Territory. The Torres Straight Island Regional Council (TSIRC) operates a permit system for the use of landing facilities that involves the payment of maritime fees based on self-reporting by vessels that use…
5-5-23 / Roger Traves KC, Stewart Webster KC, Salwa Marsh, Sarah Spottiswood, David Chesterman KC — Judicial Review & Administrative
The applicants sought review of a decision made by the Deputy Premier to “call-in” a development application made by Wanless Recycling Park Pty Ltd (Wanless). Wanless’ development application was to establish a new resource recovery and landfill facility involving the rehabilitation and reuse of existing mining voids in Ipswich. The…
Australian Electoral Commission v Kelly [2022] FCA 628
20-5-22 / Sarah Spottiswood — Judicial Review & Administrative, Appellate
The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) sought an urgent injunction the night before the federal election. It sought to restrain the display of campaign signs which the AEC contended contravened the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (Cth). Jagot J refused the application. Her Honour found that although there was a prima facie…
Bethell v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCAFC 83
16-5-22 / Sarah Spottiswood — Judicial Review & Administrative, Human Rights & Discrimination, Appellate
This was an appeal from a decision of the Federal Court (Rangiah J) dismissing the appellant’s application for habeas corpus. The Full Court of the Federal Court dismissed the appeal. Sarah Spottiswood appeared for the Respondent, instructed by the Australian Government Solicitor. The judgment is published here.
Pauga v Chief Executive of Queensland Corrective Services (No 4) [2022] FCA 339
5-4-22 / Sarah Spottiswood — Judicial Review & Administrative, Appellate
In this judicial review application, the applicant sought review of a decision under the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth). The applicant named the “Brisbane Magistrates Court” as the Second Respondent. The Attorney-General of Queensland intervened in the proceeding to assist the Court on whether the Brisbane Magistrates Court should be removed…
