Hurst v State of Queensland (No 2)

Hurst v State of Queensland (No 2) involved the appellant seeking injunctive relief and/or compensation for alleged discrimination under the Disability Discrimination Act. The court was tasked with determining whether the appellant was entitled to such relief given the circumstances of her case and the passage of time since the alleged discriminatory acts. The primary issue before the court was whether the appellant had established a sufficiently high likelihood of future injury to warrant the immediate grant of a quia timet injunction. The court also considered whether the passage of time and changes in circumstances rendered injunctive relief inappropriate.

The court held that the evidence did not sufficiently establish the likelihood of a future contravention of the appellant's rights, which alone was a basis for refusing the injunction sought. Furthermore, the court noted that over four years had passed since the alleged discriminatory acts, and the circumstances had changed significantly. The appellant was at a different stage of her development, and the education services available to her and offered by the respondent were different from what was available at the time of the alleged contraventions. The court found that these changes further supported the denial of injunctive relief.

Given the reasons outlined, the court refused the appellant's application for injunctive relief and/or compensation. The court concluded that neither the evidence before the primary judge nor the evidence subsequently adduced established the likelihood of a future contravention of the appellant's rights to a sufficient degree to justify the immediate grant of an injunction. Additionally, the court considered the changes in circumstances and the passage of time as sound reasons for denying injunctive relief.

ORDERS:
1. The appellant’s application for injunctive relief and/or compensation be refused.