Protecting us all: 2012 report on the operation of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Page 43

Chapter 3: The Charter in the courts 41

A & B v Children's Court of Victoria & Ors
(Supreme Court)

Discussed at page 33.

Lowe v Secretary to the Department of Justice;
Nigro v Secretary to the Department of Justice;
Ghebrat v Secretary to the Department of
Justice (Court of Appeal)

This case involved three separate appeals
against supervision orders made by the County
Court under the Serious Sex Offenders (Detention
and Supervision) Act 2009. There was a question
regarding the impact of the Charter on the
interpretation of the test as to when a court can
make a supervision order. The Act provides that
a person can be subject to a supervision order
if they represent an "unacceptable risk" to the
community.

The Commission submitted that while the
Charter does not affect the interpretation of the
phrase "unacceptable risk", it does affect the
interpretation of the statutory discretion as to
when a court may make a supervision order and
the conditions the order imposes. Depending
on the conditions imposed, an order could limit
the rights to privacy, freedom of movement,
liberty, freedom of association and freedom
from medical treatment without consent. The
Commission submitted that the discretion should
be exercised compatibly with human rights so
that a court only imposes conditions that are
proportionate to the level and nature of the risk.

At the time of writing, the Court had not yet
handed down its decision.

Re Beth (Supreme Court)

Discussed at page 36.