Litigants shouldn’t bear court costs, say BigLaw firms – Lawyers Weekly

The proposed introduction of a positive duty to prevent sexual harassment is “only one piece of the puzzle” — ensuring that claimants can viably enforce their rights, through Australia’s courts, is fundamental, say national plaintiff firms.

As reported yesterday by Lawyers Weekly, over 100 lawyers and legal organisations have signed a letter to the Attorney-General and Minister for Women, expressing “deep concern” over the proposal (in the Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022) for litigants to bear their own costs in sexual harassment cases, which could also make it “uneconomical” for law firms to offer no-win-no-fee arrangements.

As Women’s Legal Service NSW principal solicitor Pip Davis noted, the bill “misses an important opportunity to address the power imbalance experienced by working women bringing actions against their employers”.

The risk, Ms Davis pointed out, is that if a claimant loses, “they have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal costs”.

Shine Lawyers head of employment law Samantha Mangwana — another letter signatory – added that the proposed reform seeks to remove the ordinary rule that the loser pays the winner’s costs.

Legislators must bear in mind, Ms Mangwana continued, that those costs may then exceed compensation.

Without certainty on costs, and needing to weigh that up against compensation, plaintiff lawyers will not be able to offer no-win-no-fee agreements even in cases they believe will win, Ms Mangwana hypothesised.

To remove the deterrent of an adverse costs risk, and ensure that victim-survivors still recover meaningful compensation after their legal costs, a simple alternative would be to substitute the costs rule from federal whistleblower protections, since these too are cases brought in the public interests.

“Costs can then only be awarded against a plaintiff if the case was brought vexatiously or without reasonable cause, or conducted unreasonably.”

Source: Litigants shouldn’t bear court costs, say BigLaw firms – Lawyers Weekly

Qantas doubles down on sexual harassment defence | The Oz

Two senior female Qantas pilots this week publicly raised allegations of sexism and harassment – and one has filed a claim against the airline – while working in the cockpit raising the alarm on gender inequality amongst airline staff.

A review of Qantas cabin crew and pilots was conducted by former Sex Discrimination Commissioner Elizabeth Broderick in 2019, finding more than one quarter of female pilots reported experiences of sexual harassment over the previous 12 months.

Davida Forshaw, who is currently employed by Qantas but is on medical leave, last week filed a sexual harassment suit in the federal court against the airline. In the filing, revealed by The Oz, Forshaw claimed she received a poor performance report after she rejected sexual advances from an airline captain, was instructed to get coffee for her male counterparts while participating in an engineering briefing, and was told she “would do a lot better” if she dyed her hair blonde and wore a push up bra.

The Flight Attendants’ Association of Australia has called for Australia’s major airlines to implement gender quotas for pilots, as “more women up the front would have a positive benefit for cabin crew” and help squash the “trolley dolly” stereotype amongst cabin crew.

Across Qantas Group, 7 per cent of pilots are females. and at QantasLink, the airline’s regional arm, 13.2 per cent of pilots are women.

Source: Qantas doubles down on sexual harassment defence | The Oz

Funding shortfalls force Melbourne legal centre to stop taking calls on police misconduct | Law (Australia) | The Guardian

The Police Accountability Project, which is based at Inner Melbourne Community Legal Centre, is only taking on new clients referred to it by other lawyers and the most egregious cases, as it can no longer operate a phone intake line that had previously serviced as many as 400 people a year.

An open letter urging the state government to establish an independent police ombudsman was sent to the premier, Daniel Andrews, on Friday.

The current model of police oversight is under review, but the state government appears highly unlikely to announce significant reforms to the sector before November’s state election.

The letter said police should no longer investigate police and that the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (Ibac) should be stripped of its current police oversight role in favour of the ombudsman model.

Their letter said any oversight system must be truly independent, well-resourced, complainant-centred and culturally appropriate, fair, accountable and transparent, able to achieve timely and fair outcomes, and promote systemic change.

Kirsty Mac, a Melbourne woman whose own police complaint took five years to resolve, backed calls for a new approach.

“I’m lucky that I’m a middle-class white lady. I had all the resources at my disposal to continue on for five years. But most people don’t.”

Source: Funding shortfalls force Melbourne legal centre to stop taking calls on police misconduct | Law (Australia) | The Guardian

Queensland police commissioner grilled over handling of complaints against senior officers, inquiry hears – ABC News

Source: Queensland police commissioner grilled over handling of complaints against senior officers, inquiry hears – ABC News

Sexual violence rife on dating apps

Dating apps need to better protect their users, after a study revealed high rates of sexual violence, stalking, assault and unwanted sharing of explicit images.

The Australian Institute of Criminology survey of 9987 app users found three-quarters were victims of some form of online sexual violence in the past five years.

One-third experienced in-person abuse from someone they met on an app, with 27 per cent of those reporting incidents of sexual assault or coercion, such as drink spiking.

Among those physically assaulted, nearly 20 per cent said they had been the victim of sexual health abuse such as “stealthing”, when a condom is removed without consent.

Among heterosexual respondents, 79 per cent of women reported some form of online violence, compared with 61 per cent of men.

Rates of sexual violence through dating apps were higher among LGBTQI people, with 87 per cent of women reporting abuse and 79 per cent of men.

The study said dating apps should prioritise safety via easier reporting processes, tougher ID verification to ban perpetrators, and censorship of explicit images.

The histories of conversations between users also need to be stored by the platforms to help victims who report abuse to the authorities, the authors wrote.

Source: Sexual violence rife on dating apps | Newcastle Herald | Newcastle, NSW

‘Abhorrent behaviour’: Sexual harassment and bullying rife in NSW parliament

One third of respondents to a survey of staffers in the NSW parliament said they have experienced bullying or sexual harassment at work, according to a new report released on Friday.

The report indicates that the key drivers of the harmful behaviour that occurs in NSW parliament include the unequal distribution of power between politicians and staff, and the underrepresentation of women and people of diverse background in decision-making roles.

Women were more likely to experience sexual harassment than men across all roles, with female MPs (46 per cent) being the most likely group to report experiencing sexual harassment.

In the report, younger female staffers talked about sexual harassment as being normalised in the workplace, mentioning the unequal power dynamics between MPs and staffers.

“It’s very normalised, the MP and Chief of Staff sleeping with junior staff. The power dynamics were so unbalanced, it thwarted any possibility of a balanced relationship,” one staffer told the review.

Source: ‘Abhorrent behaviour’: Sexual harassment and bullying rife in NSW parliament

Strip search class action filed against State of NSW – Lawyers Weekly

Slater and Gordon and Redfern Legal Centre have filed proceedings in the Supreme Court of NSW against the state on behalf of people who were allegedly “invasively and unlawfully searched” by police.

According to a joint statement from the firm and CLC, “group members also allege that some people who were searched – including minors – were directed by police to lift or remove items of clothing, lift their breasts and genitals, or strip naked and squat and cough so officers could visually inspect body cavities. Women were ordered to remove sanitary products so they too could be inspected”.

The strip searches that group members were subjected to, the Statement of Claim notes, were allegedly “conducted in contravention of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2022 (NSW).

Redfern Legal Centre senior police accountability solicitor Samantha Lee said: “Our investigations show that invasive and unlawful police searches at NSW festivals have become routine, resulting in very few charges, but leaving thousands of young people and minors humiliated and severely traumatised.”

“With this class action, Redfern Legal Centre and Slater and Gordon are seeking compensation and redress for the significant numbers of people believed to have been unlawfully searched,” she said.

Redfern Legal Centre senior police accountability solicitor Samantha Lee said: “Our investigations show that invasive and unlawful police searches at NSW festivals have become routine, resulting in very few charges, but leaving thousands of young people and minors humiliated and severely traumatised.”

“With this class action, Redfern Legal Centre and Slater and Gordon are seeking compensation and redress for the significant numbers of people believed to have been unlawfully searched,” she said.

The firm and CLC will also, Ms Lee went on, look to the courts to make findings that will ensure this “traumatising police practice becomes the exception, not the rule”.

Slater and Gordon Class Actions associate Meg Lessing added that hundreds of people had already registered for the group proceeding, since the firm and CLC announced that a class action was being investigated against police in relation to unlawful searches at Splendour in the Grass music festivals, dating back to 2016.

Raya Meredith, who is the lead plaintiff, was allegedly strip searched by police for 30 minutes at the Splendour in the Grass festival in 2018, an ordeal that found no drugs.

Group members are seeking damages, aggravated damages, exemplary damages, costs and interest.

For those whose searches were “particularly invasive or distressing”, the firm and CLC wrote, damages could be in the order of tens of thousands of dollars.

Source: Strip search class action filed against State of NSW – Lawyers Weekly

Calls for downblousing to be made a criminal offence in England and Wales – BBC News

The Law Commission wants to strengthen the law to protect victims of intimate image abuse.

The key proposals are:

  • It would be an offence for someone to intentionally take or share an intimate image of a person without their consent
  • This new base offence would apply regardless of the perpetrator’s motivation and could lead to a maximum sentence of six months’ imprisonment
  • If someone takes or shares an intimate image without consent to obtain sexual gratification, or to cause humiliation, alarm or distress, threatens to share an intimate image, or installs hidden equipment, they could receive a sentence of two to three years’ imprisonment.

However, Kate Isaacs, founder of Not Your Porn – which aims to hold the porn industry accountable for the distribution and commercialisation of non-consensual material – said: “The thing that concerns me the most is it doesn’t look like there’s anything in terms of profiting from [image-based sexual abuse] or platform responsibility here, which is really worrying.

“Addressing the installation of equipment such as a hidden camera is all very well and good, but I’ve worked on a number of cases with women who have been secretly recorded without their consent and then that footage has been uploaded to a platform that has allowed someone to profit from that content.”

Source: Calls for downblousing to be made a criminal offence in England and Wales – BBC News

Clash between trans and women’s rights

The founder of a women’s only social networking app has found herself at the centre of a charged debate about the cross section of trans and women’s rights.

It’s a battle between advocates for trans rights – who have said trans people suffer from high rates of abuse and assault, and are already marginalised – and advocates and lawyers for women’s rights – who say sex discrimination laws allow for “special measures” to promote women’s equality and exclude men.

Ms Grover, the founder of the female-only social networking app Giggle, has been accused of discriminating against a trans woman after she denied her access to the platform.

Roxanne Tickle, the Lismorebased trans woman, filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission on January 20 this year. “The app provider appears to not recognise transgender women as female. I am legally permitted to identify as female,” her complaint stated.

The case was brought to the Federal Circuit Court, but was inexplicably dropped on Monday.

Ms Grover welcomed the news on Wednesday, but may consider action to prevent a similar case from being brought against her in the future.

Ms Grover, who is about to give birth to her first child, said all she ever wanted to do was create an online “safe” space dedicated to women.

Source: Subscribe to The Australian | Newspaper home delivery, website, iPad, iPhone & Android apps

Tickle vs. Giggle | The Spectator Australia

A landmark case is about to hit the Federal Court that will either confirm or challenge the ongoing attempt by the Australian government to erase ‘women, ‘female’, and ‘girl’ as sex-based categories.

Tickle vs. Giggle could be the title of a tween pillow fight, but it is the culmination of years of the legal erasure in Australia of the link between Australian women as recognised legally and the vulnerabilities of the female body.

Unfortunately, this is by no means a fair fight. Gender identity is a top-down movement, and the push for sex-based rights is bottom-up. Tickle will seek assistance from affiliates of billion-dollar law firms like Dentons, while Giggle and Grover will look to crown[sic] funding predominately from ordinary women.

Flat White

Tickle vs. Giggle

A landmark case is about to hit the Federal Court that will either confirm or challenge the ongoing attempt by the Australian government to erase ‘women, ‘female’, and ‘girl’ as sex-based categories.

Tickle vs. Giggle could be the title of a tween pillow fight, but it is the culmination of years of the legal erasure in Australia of the link between Australian women as recognised legally and the vulnerabilities of the female body.

Sall Grover is a Gold Coast businesswoman who heads a social media company called Giggle. Giggle is an app for females. The intention of Giggle is to provide a safe digital space for women and girls, where they can find a flatmate, organise socially, date (if they are same-sex attracted), and chat in an environment free of males. You can read Sall’s story for yourself, which involves her recovery from the well-publicised systemic sexual abuse problems in the Californian film industry.

In the early days of the Giggle app, Sall was faced with the decision to make the app for women as a sex or women as a gender. After a sustained campaign of abuse and harassment by people calling themselves ‘transwomen’, Sall decided to make the app exclusively for females, including trans-identifying females or ‘transmen’. On Giggle, it would be the possession of female body, regardless of identity, that puts you in the ‘in’ crowd.

In January 2022, Sall Grover received a complaint from the Australian Human Rights Commission. The complaint was lodged by Roxy Tickle and referenced a tweet exchange between Sall and Roxy in January 2021 in regard to the McIver’s Ladies Baths in Sydney. The complaint also referenced interaction on the Giggle app where Roxy allegedly gained access and was removed on the basis of sex.

Sall Grover received the initial AHRC complaint by Tickle not long after she announced her pregnancy on Twitter. The complaint remains unresolved because Sall refused to attend gender identity re-education and open her app to males.

Tickle has now filed for a hearing in the Federal Court against Giggle and Sall Grover personally.

Unfortunately, this is by no means a fair fight. Gender identity is a top-down movement, and the push for sex-based rights is bottom-up. Tickle will seek assistance from affiliates of billion-dollar law firms like Dentons, while Giggle and Grover will look to crown funding predominately from ordinary women.

‘Trans women’ we are told must be trusted without question by women, mothers, lesbians, and children in exactly that same way as biological women are, not because, as in days of old, that these males are physically or chemically castrated, but just because they have a special female essence or morality. Like it or not, women don’t always trust men who claim to have mystical powers that make them innocuous.

If Tickle wins, it will establish that males have a legal right, not just to the female sex category, but all female spaces, to view the female naked body in those spaces and to expose his male body to women and girls in public female facilities. It will also compel women to submit to the state-mandated definition of a woman, which makes her not just a subset of her own sex class, but an underclass.

Reflecting this in a dystopian tweet in February last year, Tickle insisted that Sall Grover should not refer to herself as ‘female’. Tickle said, ‘You keep on using the word “female” but I think you mean cis female?… with an F on my birth certificate … I am legally female in Australia. All of my cis girlfriends treat me the same as them.’

Grover replied, ‘For me, being treated as female is getting death threats.’

[ed: Since this article was printed Tickle has discontinued the proceedings]

Source: Tickle vs. Giggle | The Spectator Australia