Brooke Winter Solicitor, Author at Brooke Winter Solicitors

Under section 362B of the Public Health Act 2005 (QLD) there is a Direction from the Chief Health Officer in relation to entry into Queensland. Do you understand the Directions and what this means for you?

If you are seeking to enter, or proposing to enter Queensland from another State or Territory you are required to:

provide a valid Queensland Border Declaration Pass; and
provide an undertaking that the person will present for a COVID-19 test if the person develops symptoms consistent with COVID-19 within 14 days of entering Queensland; and
comply with the undertaking while present in Queensland.

Further to the Declaration Pass, you must provide information as requested in relation to the following:

Your full name, date of birth, phone number, address and email address; and
Whether you are a confirmed or cleared case of COVID-19, and
If requested you must provide satisfactory evidence of your identity (for example, a driver’s licence or Medicare care card); and
If requested, you are required to provide evidence that the person resides in the border zone; and
Any other information required by an emergency officer (public health).

The following questions may be asked in relation to the previous 14 days prior to attempting to enter Queensland if you have; been overseas, been in a COVID-19 hotspot, had contact with a person who is a confirmed case of COVID-19, been a cleared case of COVID-19, had symptoms consistent with COVID-19; or if a border zone resident, been in a COVID-19 hotspot outside the border zone. Failure to provide the information as requested can lead to criminal penalties.

If you fail to comply with the Direction the maximum penalty is 6 months imprisonment or $13,345.00.

The Queensland Government’s tough new border restrictions encompass few exceptions- including for families who have shared custody agreements across state borders.

Under the new Border Restriction Direction, the only exemptions are:

if the person is a Queensland resident
if the person is moving to Queensland as a new resident
if the person is a border zone resident who is a Queensland resident
to comply with an order to attend a court or tribunal or to give effect to orders of a court or tribunal, and they must provide evidence of a court order and confirmation from the court that they are to attend in person
to fulfil a legal obligation relating to shared parenting or child contact, including as part of an order or arrangement under the Child Protection Act 1999, and they must provide evidence of a court order or a legal agreement, or
to assist with or participate in a state or Commonwealth law enforcement investigation or other action at the request or direction of a state or Commonwealth department or law enforcement agency.

What this means- if you and your co parent have an amicable parenting relationship and have not required court intervention or a legal parenting arrangement being in place- you do not have the evidence required to enter Queensland at this time to facilitate shared custody of your children.

If you need assistance in drafting a parenting plan to facilitate shared custody arrangements across the border during these unprecedented times, our office can help.

But spending the money has not been straightforward.

Whilst campaigning for her monumental fundraiser, Barber told the world the money would be distributed across multiple states and charities for bushfire relief. However, the nominated beneficiary of Barber’s fundraiser was the Trustee for NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) and Brigades Donation Fund.

Why is this a problem?

The RFS donation fund is governed by a “trust deed”. The fine print limits what the Trust can use donations for.

…to or for the brigades in order to enable or assist them to meet the costs of purchasing and maintaining fire-fighting equipment and facilities, providing training and resources and/or to otherwise meet the administrative expense of the brigade which are associated with their volunteer-based service activities…

Effectively, Barber’s $51 million dollar fundraiser can only be spent on equipment, training, resources or administrative costs for RFS brigades. In other words, it cannot be distributed amongst other states or charities as Barber intended.

Given the intense global attention on the issue, the RFS sought the advice of the NSW Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in May, that despite the expectations of Barber and the million or so donors – the money can only be spent as set out in the RFS “trust deed”.

The decision disappointed many donors and Barber herself.

In an attempt to loosen the strict terms of the RFS Trust Deed, the NSW Green Party introduced The Rural Fires Amendment Bill 2020 to the NSW Parliament to change the Rural Fires Act.

Greens MP and justice spokesperson David Shoebridge said:

“We want to ensure the intentions of the more than one million donors are respected and this record donation is able to be used to do more than offset government expenditure on the RFS,”

However, documents tendered to NSW Parliament revealed the RFS have already spent about $20 million of the cash.

Barber has recently spoken out about the Amendment Bill.

“My concern is that if it is not possible to help these people have their money allocated to where they want it to go in this unprecedented instance that this may be the last we see of such generosity on such an international scale”.

The RFS are arguing that the Amendment Bill will undermine public confidence in charities.

What lessons should we take away from this?

1. If you’re setting up a fundraiser – do some due diligence first.

2. Read the fine print.

Ardent Leisure has been formally charged over the tragic death of four people on 26 October 2016 when the Thunder River Rapids ride malfunctioned at Dreamworld on the Gold Coast.

A coronial inquest was conducted into the tragedy which heard that a water pump feeding the ride had broken down causing a sudden drop in the water levels.

The inquest made findings of a series of failures at the park. These included safety and maintenance systems that the coroner described as “rudimentary at best” and “frighteningly unsophisticated”.

Coroner James McDougall stated there had been a “systemic failure by Dreamworld in relation to all aspects of safety”. Mr McDougall further stated that he was referring parent company Ardent Leisure to the Office of Industrial Relations for a possible breach of workplace laws.

Ardent Leisure released a statement to the Australian Stock Exchange that three charges had been filed against the company under the Work Health and Safety Act (‘the Act’). They indicated that they would update the market when the matter has been determined.

The charges allege that the company failed to comply with a health and safety duty which exposes an individual to a risk of death or serious injury. The charges laid are the maximum charges that are in the Act.

Under the Act each breach holds a maximum penalty of 1.5 million, or 4.5 million in total.

Queensland Industrial Relations Minister Grace said she welcomed the charges laid by the Work Health and Safety prosecutors and was supportive of swift action.

These charges against Ardent Leisure are next before the Southport Magistrates Court on 29 July 2020.

“I didn’t do it, I’ve made a lot of mistakes in my life, but I’m not a murderer.

You’re killing an innocent man.”

These were Daniel Lewis Lee’s final words. Lee was executed in a US prison by lethal injection overnight. He was convicted of killing three people in 1996.

Execution by lethal injection has been legal in the United States of America since 1977. However, Lee was the first execution undertaken by the US Bureau of Prisons since 2003 after a federal moratorium on executions.

The federal moratorium ended in July 2019 after US Attorney General William Barr declared:

“The Justice Department upholds the rule of law- and we owe it to the victims and their families to carry forward the sentence imposed by our justice system.”

However, in the circumstance of Lee- the victims’ families were not supportive of his execution. Lee’s execution came after an eleventh-hour bid failed for a stay of execution. The execution was carried out anyway, in the cover of night, and the families of the victims were prevented from being there.

Execution by lethal injection has long been criticized as inhumane and barbaric.

Dennis McQuire gasped for air for 25 minutes while the lethal injection slowly took effect. Clayton Lockett died of a heart attack- not the lethal injection- 43 minutes after the start of his execution. Joseph Wood repeatedly gasped for one hour and 40 minutes before his death was pronounced. Executioners left Doyle Lee Hamm with 12 puncture marks, including six in his groin and others that punctured his bladder and penetrated his femoral artery- before his execution was called off.

Lee’s execution paves the way for others on death. Death row inmates Wesley Ira Purkey, Dustin Lee Honken and Keith Dwayne Nelson could be executed this month.

Kyran Seeto, a Gold Coast accountant has taken on a legal battle with Google over reviews ‘anonymously’ made in relation to his business.

There are a number of reviews providing wordless one-star ratings and critique about his business. Mr Seeto does not believe they have been clients of his firm.

One review by a Google user under the name of ‘Emma Anderson’ posted a review stating:

“Don’t bother going to this one…unless you want your concerns and enquires to be met with hostility…my favourite is when the account (sic) said to me, ‘That’s a joke, I don’t believe that, that’s a joke…they need training in customer service…Max accountants can take up to 20 days to even lodge your tax, they don’t tell you that…Wouldn’t bother, my first time using them and I know I’ll be going back to my old accountant”

Mr Seeto said he is trying to build a business and with “literally a keystroke they can destroy you…it’s not fair”.

Mr Seeto has suffered a significant impact to his business since the false reviews have been posted.

Justice David O’Callaghan agreed that the court could and should hear the case and that Mr Seeto has a prima facie case.

This is not the first time small businesses have taken on internet giant Google.

In South Australia an Adelaide lawyer won a $750,000 defamation payout against a woman who had never been a client but posted a bad review about his firm on Google. Later the same year, Google was ordered to pay $40,000 in damages in relation to defamation of a Melbourne lawyer.

In Melbourne, Justice Melinda Richards ruled that Google was a publisher, despite their denials and went on to say “The Google search engine … is not a passive tool”.

What are your thoughts?

Should Google and/ or the persons posting false reviews be held accountable?

At 12 midday today the Queensland border opened up to everyone except Victorian residents. Everyone else will have to quarantine for 14 days in a hotel at their own expense if in the previous two weeks;

the person been overseas; or
the person has had known contact with a person who is a confirmed case of COVID-19; or
the person has been in a COVID-19 hotspot; or
the person has had COVID-19 or has had symptoms consistent with COVID-19.

To enter into Queensland an online declaration has to be completed. It is an offence to provide false information on that declaration and a fine of up to $13,345.00 can apply.

It is an offence to Contravene a Reasonable Direction of a Police Officer. It is also an offence to Obstruct a Police Officer in the Execution of their Duties. Obstruct Police essentially is anything that makes an officer’s lawful job more difficult than what it needs to be. This can include behaviour such as resisting a lawful arrest. Fines or jail could be imposed for such an offence.

A person could be refused entry to Queensland if they do not satisfy the Police of their identity or they have completed a false declaration or provide false information to the police.

If you have any questions or find yourself with a police charge then you need to get reliable legal advice. Call Brooke Winter Solicitors on 1300 066 669

3000 public housing residents in Melbourne, have been forced inside their apartments since Saturday. The detention direction was enforced immediately, and residents have been forbidden from leaving their apartments.

The lockdown is being enforced by a significant police presence, with officers on every floor and no indication has been given for how long the lockdown will last.

From their windows, they can see their neighbours in private apartment blocks, leave their property for the four main reasons allowed under the Victoria’s stage three restrictions. Residents of these private apartment blocks were also given 24 hours’ notice of the detention direction so they could prepare for the impending lockdown period.

The disparity is insulting.

The government’s justification for this action is that residents of public housing are vulnerable and living in high density with many shared spaces.

Emma King of the Victorian Council of Social Service CEO, has responded to the justification, stating “the lockdown of the public housing residences looks like a crime scene. A pandemic response should not be a crime scene. It is a collective, public health issue from which no one is immune”.

The public housing lockdowns is a police-led intervention. The residents of the affected towers are not criminals and do not need more policing – they, like their private neighbour, should be given the dignity of a humanitarian and health care response.

The COVID-19 pandemic has already caused an enormous impact on Australia’s economy, with a second wave erupting in Victoria there are concerns our economy will take further hits.

Victoria has been hit the hardest. The economic output of Victoria alone will fall but 3.5 per cent, closely followed by Tasmania and Western Australia.

New South Wales, South Australia and Queensland are all expected to see falls of 2.9 per cent.

New South Wales accounts for approximately one third of the national economic output with Victoria accounting for approximately a quarter.

The closure is set to cause further setbacks for the tourism and travel industries and local businesses.

It is the first time in over a century that the border between Victoria and New South Wales is shutting. With the last time occurring in 1918-19 during the Spanish flu pandemic.

The Australian Industry Group chief Innes Willox has warned that there will likely be huge disruptions caused did to these closures and even went on to cite Cold War Germany.

“The border closure puts up a Berlin Wall between our two biggest states which represent more than half our national economy, and cuts in two our country’s main economic artery”

What are your thoughts, are the border closures the lesser of two evils?

Although the closures will cause significant economic loss during this time, some say it is preferable over the potential for further states having a ‘second wave’.

WHEN IS THE ELECTION AND WHO ARE THE BIG CONTENDERS?

This year the 2020 US elections will occur on 3 November 2020. This will allow voters to select the next president for their country. Voters will be able to choose Donald Trump again or select a new candidate. If a new candidate is selected, Donald Trump’s term as president will come to an end on 20 January 2021. It appears that Donald Trump’s biggest competitor will be Joe Biden, the popular Democratic nominee. As you may be aware, in the US, there are two parties considered by most voters – the Democrats (liberal) and the Republications (the conservative). When it comes to the Republicans, Trump is currently facing little serious challenges.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER CONTENDERS?

There is speculation about another celebrity running for president this year. This will be highly controversial and would have a significant negative impact on the US if elected. There are questions to be asked about how and if running the country could be done successfully from a celebrity with no political or legal experience. Nevertheless, at this point in time, there is no solid evidence which shows that the celebrity will be running for president.

Another contender is Bernie Sanders. Bernie is known as being a “Democratic socialist” and came close to nomination in 2016. Key issues he has mentioned include Medicare for all universal healthcare coverage, raising taxes for the wealthy, and increasing the minimum wage. As mentioned, the other Democrat which has been popular is Joe Biden. Joe is a Veteran politician and well known as Barack’s Obama’s vice-president in 2009. Key issues that Joe has mentioned include rebuilding the middle class, investing in infrastructure, and tuition-free public universities.

HOW WILL THE WINNER BE DETERMINED?

While popular votes can be determined earlier than the 3 November 2020, this will have nothing to do with the actual winner of the 3 November 2020. This is because it is possible to win the popular vote, but the lose the electoral vote which is what happened to Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016.

On the 3 November 2020, voters will go-in person to an official polling place. Following this, each state will handle its own vote counting and a winner should be determined that night.

WILL CORONAVIRUS IMPACT THE ELECTION?

The coronavirus has already impacted the voting in the US. Many states have been under pressure to increase the option of mail voting, especially in the states that require voters to provide a proper reason why they cannot vote in person.

The impact of coronavirus is also important for the Election Day whereby people will have to go in-person to an official polling place because there is no online voting available. Overall however, it is unlikely that there will be any delay in terms of the Election Day.

Are you new to the Criminal Justice System?

In need of representation?

Criminal Law

Traffic Law

Domestic Violence

Additional Services

Share This