0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/down_dis.png)
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
Decision by the High Court, I assume the law talking guy's sentences that I've bolded will be interesting moving forward for the Folau camp?
A former public servant at the centre of a landmark free speech case has lost her High Court fight after it was found tweets she sent critical of the Federal Government breached the public service code of conduct.
Michaela Banerji argued she had been unlawfully fired in 2013, from what was then the Department of Immigration and Border Protection.
She had operated the Twitter profile LaLegale, which frequently posted opinions critical of the Australian Government, its immigration policies, and its treatment of immigration detainees.
Ms Banerji was sacked from her role for breaching the Australian Public Service (APS) Code of Conduct, after an internal investigation linked her to the Twitter account.
She took her case to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, which found her sacking had impeded her implied right to freedom of political communication.
But today the High Court unanimously ruled that was not the case, and that the APS code was proportionate to its purpose of maintaining an apolitical public service.
The decision has also ended Ms Banerji's hopes for compensation.
"The only advantage of this case and taking this action was to affirm the role of this freedom of speech for public servants, and we failed," she said.
"It's not just a loss for me, it's a loss for all of us, and I'm very, very, very sorry."
Her lawyer, Allan Anforth, said he expected the decision to have far-reaching consequences.
"The implications don't stop at the boundary of public servants," he said outside the court.
"The implication is that for any employee-employer relationship, if the employee is critical of the employer's position on some politically relevant social issue, they can be sacked.
"This is a really naive decision in terms of the political realities of what exist in the community."
Mr Anforth said the decision effectively meant anything a public servant did had to be "with loyalty to the government" and not critical of it.
"It is basically saying that if you take the Queen's shilling, you surrender your rights to participate in the political process," he said.
"They justify that by saying the public service is an apolitical, permanent, career public service."
But Mr Anforth said that view of the public service was "disjointed from reality".
"It's a 1960s, 1970s view that the public service is staffed by permanent professional, career public servants — they're not," he said.
"Most of the public service is contractors and others they come, they go — they're appointed for their political views.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-...ision/11377990
Interesting![]()
80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?
Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!
Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!
Certainly is. My understanding is that a large chunk of the Australian legal system reports to the Attorney-General. Does that mean they are now precluded from passing any judgement that isn't loyal to the sitting government...?
Israel Folau deletes social media accounts ahead of legal battle with Rugby Australia
Staff writers with AAP
PerthNow
August 12, 2019 2:37PM
Israel Folau has quit Instagram and Twitter ahead of his legal fight with Rugby Australia.
Those heading to the former Wallaby’s Instagram page will be met with the message: “Sorry, this page isn’t available.”
It’s the same for his Twitter account, with both understood to have been deactivated sometime Monday.
The move comes on the eve of a directions hearing into his unlawful sacking claim against the rugby body.
Folau and Rugby Australia failed to reach an agreement at a mediation hearing at the Fair Work Commission in June.
"Unfortunately, our conciliation before the Fair Work Commission did not resolve the matters between us and I have been left with no choice but to commence court action," Folau said previously in a statement.
RA terminated Folau's multimillion-dollar contract over a social media post in which he paraphrased a Bible passage, saying "drunks, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists and idolaters" would go to hell unless they repented.
The committed Christian argues he was unfairly dismissed on religious grounds.
Folau, 30, is seeking $10 million in damages from RA and wants his contract reinstated.
The matter is listed for a directions hearing in the Federal Circuit Court in Melbourne on August 13.
https://www.perthnow.com.au/sport/ru...ng-b881289223z
80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?
Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!
Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!
Well then, according to his Dad/Pastor/CFO, Izzy is on the highway to hell with all the rest of us sinners. Right?
Folau court date set: Potential Wallabies World Cup distraction fears allayed
By Georgina Robinson
Updated August 13, 2019
Rugby Australia will avoid a potentially embarrassing distraction during the Wallabies' World Cup campaign after their legal fight with former star Israel Folau looks set to stretch into the new year.
Folau's unlawful termination case against his former employers RA and the NSW Waratahs has been set down for a potential three-to five-day trial in the Federal Circuit Court on February 4 next year.
The date means Australia's World Cup campaign will proceed without the ongoing shadow of former first-choice fullback Folau hanging over them, although it will collide with the start of the Waratahs' new Super Rugby season, which kicks off in the first week of February.
However, Federal Circuit Court Chief Judge Will Alstergren made it clear in court on Tuesday morning that the parties would be expected to attempt mediation by the middle of December.
Folau’s barrister, high profile employment law expert Stuart Wood QC, accused RA of trying to delay proceedings by applying to have the matter moved to the Federal Court or to the Federal Circuit Court’s Sydney base.
“There is no merit in the application and it will only lead to delay and increased costs,” Wood told the court, adding that his team were conscious there would be more attempts to delay proceedings.
“We want the court to know what is going on in the background.”
RA’s barrister, Adam Hochroth, from Banco Chambers, denied RA was trying to hold up the process.
“The application was not brought to cause delay,” Hochroth said.
Judge Alstergren did not rule on the application but earlier noted that the Federal Circuit Court was the appropriate court for an employment law case and that Folau had a common law right to choose where his case should be heard.
“I am not going to allow anything to delay proceedings,” he said, responding to Wood’s concerns.
Folau was not in court on Tuesday.
The case’s “public interest” status also became a talking point during Tuesday’s hearing.
The court has opened up an online file where select documents - such as any applications made in the case - will be deposited for public viewing.
Hochroth asked that if material from RA’s code of conduct tribunal was submitted in evidence, both parties be given a period of up to three days to review it and consult with their clients before it be made public, with the view to potentially redacting sections of the material.
The tribunal, which found in May that Folau should be sacked for committing a high-level breach of the professional players’ code of conduct, was a closed process. RA requires permission from the Rugby Union Players’ Association (RUPA) to make public any material from it.
In response, Judge Alstergren said the court would balance the “significant public interest in the case against the rights of all parties”.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-u...13-p52gjt.html
80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?
Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!
Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!
The court case that could cruel Folau's challenge - Peter Fitzsimons
.................the case decided involved Dr Gary Rumble, who was a consultant for the legal firm of HWL Ebsworth, which over the last decade has been doing a lot of work for the likes of the Department of Defence and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs among others. The case turned on Dr Rumble publicly criticising the government and those departments for failing to implement the recommendations he made in his report on historical sexual abuse in the Australian Defence Force.
In the summation of the case and his findings, Justice Nye Perram, as reported by the Herald’s Michaela Whitbourn, “said Dr Rumble had ‘irritated’ the firm's managing partner, Juan Martinez, by making ‘a number of public remarks’ to the effect that ‘the government was not doing enough to implement the inquiry’s recommendations’.”......................
......................Very broadly, after it happened the first time, Dr Rumble was told by the law firm to pipe down, and stop criticising the entities that the law firm depended on for their income stream and . . .
And yes, as I told you, it already sounds familiar to the Folau case, but wait, it’s about to be eerily similar.
For Dr Rumble persisted in his damaging criticisms. Despite the firm implementing a policy, “requiring its partners and staff not to engage in criticisms of the firm’s clients without the permission of Mr Martinez,” in 2016, Dr Rumble penned a piece for The Canberra Times bitterly attacking the government again, and was shortly thereafter sacked for his trouble.
The action taken by Dr Rumble was for adverse action – unfair dismissal to you and I – and he maintained “the firm had discriminated against him on the basis of his political opinion.”................
....................Justice Perram firmly and formally disagreed in his judgment, concluding Dr Rumble “was not terminated because of his political opinion, as to which the firm was at least indifferent and quite possibly in fact sympathetic. It terminated him because he repeatedly disobeyed a reasonable direction to cease from criticising the firm’s clients.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/the-cou...04-p52o0t.html
"The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David
This is getting weird
https://www.foxsports.com.au/rugby/r...cfc040d4088c6c
Gerry! Gerry! Gerry! Gerry! (sorry, but I am supposed to be one of the cheerleaders.)
"The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David
Never saw that coming ... and never thought it would be revealed during RWC when Petaia went on Izzy's wing
The long sobs of autumn's violins wound my heart with a monotonous languor
The story that just keeps on giving
Japan and the Pacific Islands for Aussie Super 9's!
Let's have one of these in WA! Click this link: Saitama Super Arena - New Perth Stadium?
Folau off to play and maybe work in Uganda!
Uganda plans bill imposing death penalty for gay sex
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...mosexuals.html
Last edited by SNOB; 11-10-19 at 02:59.
May the FORCE be with you!