Victoria

The Abortion Law Reform Act allows a registered medical practitioner to terminate a pregnancy (perform an abortion) on a woman who is not more than 24 weeks pregnant. After 24 weeks, an abortion may still be performed if the medical practitioner believes it is appropriate in all the circumstances, and has consulted at least one other registered medical practitioner who reasonably agrees.  It also permits the supply or administration of drugs to perform and abortion by a pharmacist or registered nurse in similar situations.

This is an amending Act to the Crimes Act 1958 (Victoria).

In the case of Austin Health v. Tsikos, the respondent claimed that she had been directly discriminated against in her employment based on her age and sex. She claimed she had been denied the opportunity to renegotiate her salary which was at the rate specified in the enterprise agreement, despite (among other things) being paid considerably less than a male employee who reported to her, who was classified at a lower grade under the enterprise agreement, but was paid well above the rates specified in the enterprise agreement.

This decision concerned the appeal by Christian Youth Camps (“CYC”) against the decision of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (“VCAT”) that CYC had unlawfully discriminated against Cobaw, an organisation concerned with youth suicide prevention.  CYC, the operator of a camping facility at Phillip Island, had been established by the Christian Brethren Church and was opposed to homosexual activity on religious grounds. Cobaw had sought to rent CYC’s camping resort for the purposes of a weekend camp to be attended by homosexual young people.

The proceedings concerned the plaintiff’s entitlement to an interest in seven properties purchased by the defendant in his name during and after their nine-year relationship.  The plaintiff brought a claim under Part 9 of the Property Law Act 1958 (Vic), requesting that the Court adjust the interests in the properties on the basis of her financial and non-financial contributions to the relationship.  While the parties were not married, the court was satisfied that on the balance of probabilities, they were in a genuine domestic relationship, considering factors such as their co-ha

The Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) is the principal criminal statute in Victoria, codifying a wide range of offences, including; homicide, sexual and violent crimes, property offences, and various forms of abuse, while incorporating contemporary principles of consent, mental health defences, and protections for vulnerable persons.

This decision concerned the admissibility in a murder trial of expert evidence regarding the effects of family violence.  The defendant argued self-defense, claiming that because of the deceased’s physical and verbal violence towards him, he reasonably believed that he had to kill her in order to prevent her from killing or seriously injuring the defendant or his father.  The expert evidence in question was a general report on family violence, which considered (among other things) the cumulative psychological and social effects of family violence on an abused person.  The Cou

The respondent had previously been sentenced to 16 months’ imprisonment after pleading guilty to six charges relating to sexually assaulting, stalking, and threatening to kill his ex-wife, as well as attempting to pervert the course of justice (saying that he would kill himself if the victim did not drop the charges against him), and violating a family-violence intervention order.

The defendant had been found guilty of murdering his estranged wife in her home.  This decision concerned his sentence.  The court noted that “family violence” or “gender-based violence” are not separate crimes, but instead categorical descriptions of the relevant crime (here, murder), and that standard sentencing principles apply.

The plaintiff (under the pseudonym ‘Jane Doe’) brought proceedings to enforce the judgement of a United States district court against her former employers, Mr. and Mrs. Howard. The claims against them included involuntary servitude, forced labour, and human trafficking.  Mr. Howard did not contest the claim and had since died.  Mrs. Howard disputed the claim but failed to comply with court orders, then moved to Victoria and participated no further in the proceedings.  The U.S.