In brief: Individuals could soon gain the right to sue other individuals and companies over serious invasions of privacy if the Federal Government adopts recommendations in a long-awaited issues paper. The issues paper considers the introduction of a statutory cause of action for invasions of privacy and how to strike the right balance between an individual’s right to privacy and other important public interests, such as freedom of expression. Partner Gavin Smith (view CV) and Law Graduate Rowan Platt explain.

• Background
• A statutory cause of action
• Who will be affected?

Reproduced with permission of Allens Arthur Robinson and in accordance with their terms of use.

Brisbane Barrister – David Cormack

by Ashley Tsacalos

Recent events have renewed the focus on issues of privacy, particularly in the face of technological developments. As a result, on 21 July 2011 the Minister for Privacy, The Hon Brendan O’Connor MP, announced that the Commonwealth Government will seek the views of the public on introducing a right to privacy in Australia. A public issues paper will be issued shortly which will canvas the prospect of introducing a statutory cause of action for serious invasions of privacy. A period of public consultation will follow.

Read the article…

Reproduced with permission of Norton Rose in accordance with their legal notice and disclaimers.

Dan Harrison

July 21, 2011

NSW has joined a Queensland father in challenging the constitutional validity of the controversial national school chaplaincy program, arguing the scheme exceeds the federal government’s powers.

Read more…

• Introduction
• Overview
• Germany
• Australia
• Great Britain
• South Africa
• Canada
• Conclusion
• View all pages View individual pages

Introduction

by Richard J. Charney, Madeleine L.S. Loewenberg, Karen Ainslie, Claire Darbourne, Paul Griffin, Katrin Scheicht, Leanne Nickels

Complying with human rights legislation has become particularly important for multinational corporations. In a world where business transactions often transcend national boundaries, due diligence concerning human rights initiatives requires multinational companies to comply with legal pronouncements and social expectations to help avoid liability for human rights violations.

This bulletin describes the initiatives taken in five jurisdictions to ensure the protection of human rights and the promotion of diversity and equality of treatment for workers, whether as employees or independent contractors. The jurisdictions under consideration are Germany, Great Britain, Australia, South Africa and Canada.

Reproduced with permission of Norton Rose in accordance with their legal notice and disclaimers.

• Introduction
• Recent decision
• A timely reminder

by Murray Procter and Kristin Gamble

A recent decision has highlighted the need for employers to comply with their anti-discrimination obligations during interviews with prospective employees, or risk potential litigation.

Reproduced with permission of Norton Rose in accordance with their legal notice and disclaimers.

The Bill was introduced to parliament on 30 September 2010, and if passed will amend a number of areas, including; breastfeeding, family responsibilities and the definition of sexual harassment.

The definition of sexual harassment is amplified by the inclusion of:

(a)          the sex, age, marital status, sexual preference, religious belief, race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, of the person harassed;

(b)          the relationship between the person harassed and the person who made the advance or requestor who engaged in the conduct;

(c)           any disability of the person harassed;

(d)          any other relevant circumstance.

It will also operate provided either the person the subject of harassment or the perpetrator is in a workplace. It will not be a requirement for both to be in the same workplace.

In addition, an Age Discrimination Commissioner role is created before the Australian Human Rights Commission.

Brisbane Barrister – David Cormack

Robert McClelland’s backdown from the national Human Rights Act is “yet another humiliation for the lame duck Attorney-General”, according to Senator George Brandis SC.

Read more