Latest news with #CourtofAppeal
West Australian
8 hours ago
- Politics
- West Australian
Man claims ‘discrimination' after request for Greek Orthodox funeral for deceased 93yo father denied
A man who claimed he was subject to religious discrimination by the Queensland Government after they refused to pay for his deceased father's Greek Orthodox funeral says he was denied 'natural justice' when his case was thrown out. Angelos Angelopoulos' attempt to take the government to the state's civil tribunal was refused in 2022 after he complained he was subject to discrimination when told a grant of funding for a burial service for his father, Anastasios, would not cover the costs of a Greek Orthodox service required to help farewell the 93-year-old. After appealing the decision from the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT), Mr Angelopoulos this week suffered an additional blow in court when this fresh attempt was dismissed by the Court of Appeal in Brisbane. Anastasios died in hospital on June 23, 2018. His son sought financial assistance from the Palaszczuk-led Labor government under Queensland's Burials Assistance Act (BAA) as he could not afford to pay for the funeral service and burial at the time of Anastasios' passing. But the aid only covered the reopening of a pre-purchased burial plot, a graveside service, the funeral director's fee, a coffin and 'any required preparation of the body and transportation from the morgue to the burial site'. Angelos desired for his father to hold a Greek Orthodox funeral according to Anastasios' strong beliefs, but further financial assistance for this was refused. The Greek community and the Greek Orthodox Church stepped in to fund a church service, but it did not extend to the costs of the private viewing of Anastasios in an open coffin. It was not for another 20 weeks Mr Angelopoulos' father was buried in November 2018. In his submissions to the tribunal, he argued he was discriminated against over the requirement to bury his father 'without his complying with his father's and his own religious beliefs'. 'According to Mr Angelopoulos, a higher proportion of people who are not of Greek Orthodox faith would be able to comply with the term and bury family members without a church service or private viewing,' the Court of Appeal judgment states. The tribunal dismissed Mr Angelopoulos' application in 2022. In her decision, QCAT member Joanne Browne said Mr Angelopoulos was not treated 'less favourably' than any other person because of the decision to grant him funding under the BAA. 'The respondent's conduct is in all of the circumstances reasonable … on the basis that the conduct was necessary to comply with or is specifically authorised by the BAA,' she wrote. Ms Browne noted Mr Angelopoulos was not denied the additional costs associated with a funeral because of his religious beliefs. Under the Act, the government could only make arrangements for the disposal of a body, such as helping with a burial or cremation, and funerals were not covered under the funding arrangement. The Department of Justice and Attorney-General (DJAG) also wrote to Mr Angelopoulos informing him the Orthodox service was not part of the scope of their funding arrangement. 'Queensland is a multicultural state with diverse range of cultures and religions. Should DJAG agree to provide a church service and viewing in the current circumstances, then it would be obliged to provide a similar offer to all applicants of all cultures and religion,' the department said, according to the QCAT judgment. 'The cost to the state would be very significant and this would be a huge impost on limited government funds to provide specialised funeral services, as opposed to a simple burial, for each and every culture and religion in circumstances where burial assistance is approved.' A subsequent attempt to appeal the decision through QCAT's own appeals tribunal was also dismissed. Mr Angelopoulos then took the matter to Queensland's Court of Appeal, arguing five grounds. Some of his submissions included that he was denied natural justice due to limited evidence, the tribunal overlooked the Human Rights Act and that there was an error of fact in the respondent's argument. The Court of Appeal judgment states there was 'no jurisdiction' for at least three of the grounds of appeal. 'Leave should not be granted to the applicant given the proposed appeal does not raise questions of law arising from the final decision … in relation to grounds 1-3 and 5,' the judgment states. In addressing claims surrounding the Human Rights Act, the court found it did not raise an 'arguable error of law requiring correction to avoid substantial injustice.'
Perth Now
8 hours ago
- Politics
- Perth Now
Dad's funeral refusal ‘discrimination': court
A man who claimed he was subject to religious discrimination by the Queensland Government after they refused to pay for his deceased father's Greek Orthodox funeral says he was denied 'natural justice' when his case was thrown out. Angelos Angelopoulos' attempt to take the government to the state's civil tribunal was refused in 2022 after he complained he was subject to discrimination when told a grant of funding for a burial service for his father, Anastasios, would not cover the costs of a Greek Orthodox service required to help farewell the 93-year-old. After appealing the decision from the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT), Mr Angelopoulos this week suffered an additional blow in court when this fresh attempt was dismissed by the Court of Appeal in Brisbane. Anastasios died in hospital on June 23, 2018. Angelos Angelopoulos claimed he was subject to religious discrimination when the government refused to cover the costs of a Greek Orthodox service for his father, Anastasios, in 2018. Zak Simmonds Credit: News Corp Australia His son sought financial assistance from the Palaszczuk-led Labor government under Queensland's Burials Assistance Act (BAA) as he could not afford to pay for the funeral service and burial at the time of Anastasios' passing. But the aid only covered the reopening of a pre-purchased burial plot, a graveside service, the funeral director's fee, a coffin and 'any required preparation of the body and transportation from the morgue to the burial site'. Angelos desired for his father to hold a Greek Orthodox funeral according to Anastasios' strong beliefs, but further financial assistance for this was refused. The Greek community and the Greek Orthodox Church stepped in to fund a church service, but it did not extend to the costs of the private viewing of Anastasios in an open coffin. It was not for another 20 weeks Mr Angelopoulos' father was buried in November 2018. In his submissions to the tribunal, he argued he was discriminated against over the requirement to bury his father 'without his complying with his father's and his own religious beliefs'. 'According to Mr Angelopoulos, a higher proportion of people who are not of Greek Orthodox faith would be able to comply with the term and bury family members without a church service or private viewing,' the Court of Appeal judgment states. Anastasios Angelopoulos was not buried for 20 weeks until the Greek community and the Greek Orthodox Church stepped in to fund a church service, but it did not extend to the costs of the private viewing of Anastasios in an open coffin. Supplied Credit: Supplied Anastasios Angelopoulos with his wife Lygeri. Supplied Credit: Supplied The tribunal dismissed Mr Angelopoulos' application in 2022. In her decision, QCAT member Joanne Browne said Mr Angelopoulos was not treated 'less favourably' than any other person because of the decision to grant him funding under the BAA. 'The respondent's conduct is in all of the circumstances reasonable … on the basis that the conduct was necessary to comply with or is specifically authorised by the BAA,' she wrote. Ms Browne noted Mr Angelopoulos was not denied the additional costs associated with a funeral because of his religious beliefs. Under the Act, the government could only make arrangements for the disposal of a body, such as helping with a burial or cremation, and funerals were not covered under the funding arrangement. The Department of Justice and Attorney-General (DJAG) also wrote to Mr Angelopoulos informing him the Orthodox service was not part of the scope of their funding arrangement. 'Queensland is a multicultural state with diverse range of cultures and religions. Should DJAG agree to provide a church service and viewing in the current circumstances, then it would be obliged to provide a similar offer to all applicants of all cultures and religion,' the department said, according to the QCAT judgment. The Court of Appeal in Brisbane threw our Mr Angelopoulos' application to overturn the QCAT decision, finding there were no sufficient grounds. NewsWire/ Glenn Campbell Credit: News Corp Australia 'The cost to the state would be very significant and this would be a huge impost on limited government funds to provide specialised funeral services, as opposed to a simple burial, for each and every culture and religion in circumstances where burial assistance is approved.' A subsequent attempt to appeal the decision through QCAT's own appeals tribunal was also dismissed. Mr Angelopoulos then took the matter to Queensland's Court of Appeal, arguing five grounds. Some of his submissions included that he was denied natural justice due to limited evidence, the tribunal overlooked the Human Rights Act and that there was an error of fact in the respondent's argument. The Court of Appeal judgment states there was 'no jurisdiction' for at least three of the grounds of appeal. 'Leave should not be granted to the applicant given the proposed appeal does not raise questions of law arising from the final decision … in relation to grounds 1-3 and 5,' the judgment states. In addressing claims surrounding the Human Rights Act, the court found it did not raise an 'arguable error of law requiring correction to avoid substantial injustice.'
Edmonton Journal
a day ago
- Edmonton Journal
Do airlines owe you compensation for turbulence-induced damages? Here's what we found out
Article content Thirty people were sent to hospital, nine in serious condition, some suffering lacerations and injuries to their head, back and neck, emergency first responders in Hawaii said. Mother and daughter Renae and Stephanie Evans claimed they suffered spinal and psychological injuries during the flight. They also claimed that Air Canada, in its general rules, waived an upper limit set by an international treaty called the Montreal Convention. The New South Wales Supreme Court initially ruled in favour of the passengers, a decision which was overturned by that state's Court of Appeal. The High Court then unanimously dismissed the passengers' case. What is the Montreal Convention? The Montreal Convention (or more formally the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air) is an international treaty that was drawn up in 1999 and came into force in 2003. It sets limits for airline liabilities for everything from lost luggage to loss of life.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
B.C. man who got $8M says he'll be penniless if made to pay sex assault damages
VANCOUVER — A British Columbia man who was awarded $8 million after being wrongfully convicted of sexual assault and spending 27 years in prison says he'll be left "homeless and penniless" if forced to pay civil damages to victims who won a lawsuit against him. The B.C. Court of Appeal ruled this week that five women who were awarded $375,000 each in January against Ivan Henry can't go after his home or vehicles pending his appeal, but ordered him to pay $232,000 into a trust account. "The value of the (January) judgment exceeds my net worth," Henry said in an affidavit. "I would be homeless and have no means to support myself." Henry was convicted of 10 counts of sexual assault in 1983, but was released after an appeal determined he was wrongfully convicted and he was acquitted in 2010. The appeal ruling says Henry was awarded more than $8 million in 2018 for breaches of his Charter rights after suing the province and others for wrongful conviction, but five women sued him in 2017, alleging he sexually assaulted them in their Vancouver homes in the early 1980s. The B.C. Supreme Court sided with the women in the civil case but the appeal ruling says Henry has not taken any steps to pay them and both he and the plaintiffs have filed appeals. The five women are appealing the court's refusal to award punitive damages in the case of $1 million each. This week's ruling says Henry applied to "stay execution" of the damages award and he told the court he spent millions defending the lawsuit, gave away more than $2 million, and now lives in a mortgage-free home on a monthly stipend from old-age security and the Canada Pension Plan. Henry filed an affidavit in the Court of Appeal this month that outlines his current living situation, his finances and the history of the case. It says he has had "significant health issues" since his release from prison, undergoing quintuple bypass heart surgery in 2016. Henry, now 78, said he lives alone at his home in Hope, B.C., with an assessed value of $650,000, and he owns two vehicles worth a combined $40,000. Henry said his Charter damages were paid out in instalments. He said he "gifted" more than $2 million to family members and a former partner, and also made donations. "These gifts were unconditional gifts with no expectation of repayment," said Henry, who estimated his annual living expenses at around $40,000. He said the rest of the money went toward living expense and legal expenses fighting the civil lawsuit. Henry said he continues to have "anxiety and other long-term effects" from his time behind bars, and asked the court to allow him to remain in his home until the appeal is decided. "My home provides me with a consistent and secure environment that supports my ability to manage these challenges. It is a place where I feel safe and can maintain a routine." The Court of Appeal found discrepancies in Henry's claims, finding his evidence leaves $1.8 million "unaccounted for," while he couldn't explain where "large sums" flowing in and out of his account went between 2018 and 2023. The ruling says Henry's affidavit is "not consistent" with what he said in an examination by the plaintiffs a week before he filed the document. He had said on May 5 that he gave away an estimated $3 million by 2017. He also said he had about $2 million and a house in 2024, but lost millions defending the civil action. Justice Nitya Iyer found that it is possible Henry doesn't have the money to pay the award and may lose his home, but "inconsistencies" in his affidavit and the examination "raise real questions about whether Mr. Henry has access to more funds than he claims." The ruling says the appeal will likely be heard this fall, with a decision in the spring of 2026. Lawyers for Henry and the complainants did not immediately respond to a requests for comment. The women who sued Henry described sexual assaults in their ground-floor or basement suites between May 1981 and June 1982. The judge in January's civil ruling found Henry liable, saying "it is more likely than not that he was their attacker and performed the sexual assaults … on a balance of probabilities." This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 30, 2025. Darryl Greer, The Canadian Press
The Journal
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Journal
UK government seeks Supreme Court appeal over ruling on public inquiry in Sean Brown case
THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT has sought permission from the UK Supreme Court to appeal a court ruling that ordered it to hold a public inquiry into the killing of GAA official Sean Brown. The Court of Appeal in Belfast ruled in April that the ongoing failure to hold a public inquiry in the Brown case was unlawful and 'cannot stand'. The court affirmed an earlier High Court ruling compelling the British government to hold a public inquiry. The Appeal Court judges said their final order compelling Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn to establish an inquiry would come into effect on 2 June. Earlier this month, it was confirmed that Benn would seek leave to take the case to the Supreme Court following the Court of Appeal decision. According to the court's website , the permission to appeal from the government has now been lodged. Brown, 61, the chairman of Bellaghy Wolfe Tones GAA Club in Co Derry, was ambushed, kidnapped and murdered by loyalist paramilitaries as he locked the gates of the club in May 1997. Advertisement No one has ever been convicted of Sean Brown's murder. Alamy Stock Photo Alamy Stock Photo No-one has ever been convicted of his killing. Last year, a coroner halted an inquest into the Brown killing, expressing concern that his ability to examine the case had been 'compromised' by the extent of confidential state material being excluded from the proceedings on national security grounds. Preliminary inquest proceedings had already heard that in excess of 25 people had been linked by intelligence to the murder, including several state agents. It had also been alleged in court that surveillance of a suspect in the murder was temporarily stopped on the evening of the killing, only to resume again the following morning. Coroner Mr Justice Patrick Kinney called on the British government to establish a public inquiry into the loyalist murder. Benn decided against holding an inquiry, arguing that the case could instead be dealt with by a new Troubles investigatory body, the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR). Sean Brown's widow Bridie challenged Benn's decision not to order a public inquiry and High Court judge Mr Justice Humphreys found in her favour in December and ordered the UK government to establish one. They then appealed against that decision. The Northern Ireland Secretary contends the case involves a key constitutional principle of who should order public inquiries, the Government or the judiciary. With reporting from Press Association Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
