Stewart v State of Western Australia [2021] FCA 308

Stewart v State of Western Australia [2021] FCA 308

Applicants did not demonstrate a likelihood of success nor did the balance of convenience favour granting an injunction, as the statutory scheme clearly required immunisation or an active catch-up schedule, which was not complied with, and the public interest in preventing non-immunised attendance at school outweighed the applicant's claims.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Urgent Interlocutory Injunction
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'school Enrolment' 'public Health Law' 'disability Discrimination' 'immunisation Requirements']
['practice and Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'constitutional Law' 'human Rights'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'school Enrolment' 'public Health Law' 'disability Discrimination' 'immunisation Requirements']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application for Urgent Interlocutory Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether applicants have demonstrated sufficient likelihood of success to justify preservation of status quo until final hearing' 'Whether balance of convenience favours grant of interlocutory injunction requiring school to allow unimmunised child to attend' 'Whether principal of school had valid basis to cancel enrolment based on false or misleading information' 'Whether school enrolment provisions are constitutionally invalid due to inconsistency with Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth)']

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants did not demonstrate a likelihood of success nor did the balance of convenience favour granting an injunction, as the statutory scheme clearly required immunisation or an active catch-up schedule, which was not complied with, and the public interest in preventing non-immunised attendance at school outweighed the applicant's claims.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application for interlocutory relief is dismissed.']