Cases about review and regulation

Find summaries of past cases you may find useful about review and regulation. These case summaries show how the law was applied.

CDC Clinics & Weinstein v Health Complaints Commission

Application: Review of prohibition orders against a deregistered doctor involved in cosmetic surgery.

Decision: Prohibition order issued to second applicant affirmed. Prohibition order issued to first applicant set aside on the basis that the practice had been sold.

Significance: The regulation of cosmetic surgery has come under increasing media scrutiny, and is now the subject of a major review, following a 2021 episode of Four Corners titled Cosmetic Cowboys. The respondent previously featured on A Current Affair.

More about this case

Dependable Care Pty Ltd v Department of Families, Fairness and Housing

Application: Review of compliance notices issued for contravention of supported residential services (SRS)legislation.

Decision: Compliance notice set aside and substituted (effectively allowing the applicant more time to decide whether to shut cabins on the property or apply for the cabins to be included in the SRS).

Significance: This was the first case about the review of compliance notices issued for breaching supported residential services laws. It explores the treatment of elderly people with disabilities and on low incomes. This topic came under media scrutiny involving a different SRS provider.

More about this case

Davis v Department of Housing

Application: Jurisdictional hearing about a Freedom of Information (FOI) request. It determined whether VCAT has jurisdiction to review a (deemed) decision to deny access to requested documents, where the government agency subsequently makes a decision that no relevant documents exist.

Decision: VCAT has jurisdiction to continue its review having regard to the text, context and purpose of the relevant provisions.

Significance: The decision addresses a question stemming from amendments made to the Freedom of Information Act 1982. It explores whether changes to the law prevented VCAT from continuing a review of a decision in situations where an agency did not make a decision until after a VCAT case had been opened.

More about this case