Challenging pandemic law: From vaccine mandates to judicial review of vaccine approvals
Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Rudge, Christopher | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-11-06T07:05:41Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-11-06T07:05:41Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2024 | en_AU |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2123/33241 | |
dc.description.abstract | 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. This section provides a brief update on one recent, partially successful COVID-19 health directions case before examining two applications in the Federal Court of Australia seeking judicial review of the TGA's approval of the COVID-19 vaccines. The section argues that, while both TGA applications were dismissed for lack of standing, they illustrate how and why third parties will ordinarily not be entitled to challenge administrative decisions about therapeutic goods. | en_AU |
dc.language.iso | en | en_AU |
dc.publisher | Thomson Reuters | en_AU |
dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Law and Medicine | en_AU |
dc.rights | Copyright All Rights Reserved | en_AU |
dc.subject | vaccine mandates | en_AU |
dc.subject | COVID-19 vaccines | en_AU |
dc.subject | therapeutic goods | en_AU |
dc.subject | medical practitioners | en_AU |
dc.subject | purposivism | en_AU |
dc.subject | gene technologies | en_AU |
dc.subject | genetically modified organism | en_AU |
dc.title | Challenging pandemic law: From vaccine mandates to judicial review of vaccine approvals | en_AU |
dc.type | Article | en_AU |
dc.subject.asrc | ANZSRC FoR code::48 LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES::4804 Law in context::480412 Medical and health law | en_AU |
dc.subject.asrc | ANZSRC FoR code::48 LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES::4804 Law in context::480408 Law, science and technology | en_AU |
dc.type.pubtype | Publisher's version | en_AU |
dc.rights.other | This article was published by Thomson Reuters in the Journal of Law and Medicine and should be cited as Rudge, C. (2024). Challenging pandemic law: From vaccine mandates to judicial review of vaccine approvals. Journal of Law and Medicine, 31(2), 225–243. For all subscription inquiries please phone, from Australia: 1300 304 195, from Overseas: +61 2 8587 7980 or online at legal.thomsonreuters.com.au/search. The official PDF version of this article can also be purchased separately from Thomson Reuters at http://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/journals/subscribe-or-purchase. This publication is copyright. Other than for the purposes of and subject to the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited. PO Box 3502, Rozelle NSW 2039. legal.thomsonreuters.com.au | en_AU |
usyd.faculty | SeS faculties schools::The University of Sydney Law School | en_AU |
usyd.citation.volume | 31 | en_AU |
usyd.citation.issue | 2 | en_AU |
usyd.citation.spage | 225 | en_AU |
usyd.citation.epage | 243 | en_AU |
workflow.metadata.only | No | en_AU |
Associated file/s
Associated collections