Challenging Pandemic Law: From Vaccine Mandates to Judicial Review of Vaccine Approvals.

Over recent years, dozens of legal challenges have been instituted in response to government action during the COVID-19 pandemic. While public health orders have been challenged on several grounds, few cases have succeeded. Fewer cases still have called into question decisions made by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) to approve the COVID-19 vaccines.

Sexual Boundary Violations by Doctors - Context, Regulatory Consequences and Preventive Strategies.

While sexual boundary violations by doctors (SBVs) are viewed with utmost seriousness by disciplinary bodies and tribunals, complaints of SBVs in Australia continue to increase. In 2023, the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra) outlined a "blueprint" to protect patients better from sexual misconduct in healthcare: reform being considered in 2024, by Australian health ministers. Few analyses or studies have offered an overview of the prevalence, effects, and causes of SBVs, nor the duties, liabilities, possible disciplinary action against, and potential treatment of, doctors who commit them.

Promoting the personal importation of therapeutic goods: recent legislative amendments to advertising regulations may impact consumer access and understanding.

Objective The personal importation scheme is a legislative mechanism that allows health consumers to import unapproved medicines under certain conditions. This article analyses the legal and policy basis for the scheme and considers how reforms to advertising laws for therapeutic goods may restrict communications about it. The article represents the first published analysis of the personal importation scheme's interaction with the communications of health professionals and buyer's clubs.

Throwing a Cat among the Pridgeon(s): The New South Wales Court of Appeal and the Public Interest Test under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law.

This section examines the 2022 decision of Pridgeon v Medical Council of New South Wales in the New South Wales Court of Appeal that has taken a fundamentally different view of the public interest test employed in immediate action hearings under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law. The section starts by examining the case and then looks at the approach taken by subsequent decisions. It will argue that the decision is substantially at odds with earlier authorities from all around Australia and fails to understand properly the meaning and purpose of the test.