Latest news with #QueenslandCivilandAdministrativeTribunal
The Age
16-05-2025
- The Age
Gable Tostee cries sexism following casino ban after alleged strangling
A Gold Coast man who was acquitted after being charged with murdering his Tinder date in 2014 has launched a case against The Star for banning him from the Gold Coast casino. Eric Thomas – who changed his name from Gable Tostee in 2015 while on trial following the death of Warriena Wright – claimed he was banned from the casino because he is a man. The banning followed an incident with a female guest in April 2022. Staff reported entering a woman's hotel room and finding Thomas standing over her, fighting her while she was 'on her back with her dress up over her hips'. The woman later told police Thomas had strangled her, and obtained a domestic violence order against him. Thomas suffered bruises and bite marks, and was taken to Southport Watchhouse while the order was processed. When applying to have the ban lifted in 2023, he told The Star that police had notified him they would not pursue charges over the alleged assault, and said the woman had suffered a 'dissociative event', which caused the incident. He now claims the casino ban is discriminatory and attacks him because he is a man, and is seeking to overturn the decision and have his membership at The Star reinstated. In a hearing on April 10, Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal senior member Samantha Traves refused to reinstate Thomas' membership before additional hearings later in the year, scheduled for September and November.
Sydney Morning Herald
16-05-2025
- Sydney Morning Herald
Gable Tostee cries sexism following casino ban after alleged strangling
A Gold Coast man who was acquitted after being charged with murdering his Tinder date in 2014 has launched a case against The Star for banning him from the Gold Coast casino. Eric Thomas – who changed his name from Gable Tostee in 2015 while on trial following the death of Warriena Wright – claimed he was banned from the casino because he is a man. The banning followed an incident with a female guest in April 2022. Staff reported entering a woman's hotel room and finding Thomas standing over her, fighting her while she was 'on her back with her dress up over her hips'. The woman later told police Thomas had strangled her, and obtained a domestic violence order against him. Thomas suffered bruises and bite marks, and was taken to Southport Watchhouse while the order was processed. When applying to have the ban lifted in 2023, he told The Star that police had notified him they would not pursue charges over the alleged assault, and said the woman had suffered a 'dissociative event', which caused the incident. He now claims the casino ban is discriminatory and attacks him because he is a man, and is seeking to overturn the decision and have his membership at The Star reinstated. In a hearing on April 10, Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal senior member Samantha Traves refused to reinstate Thomas' membership before additional hearings later in the year, scheduled for September and November.
Yahoo
17-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
$10,000 pokies win divides friendship after holiday loan dispute: 'Dog act'
Welcome to legal column where lawyers Alison and Jillian Barrett from Maurice Blackburn tackle problems everyday Aussies face — whether it be consumer, property, money matters impacting relationships or work. This week, a man's friendship has turned sour over a holiday loan dispute. Question "I borrowed money from a friend for a holiday we were going on together. He agreed I could pay him back over a year. We were at the pub last week and I won $10,000 on the pokies and he was there. Now he's asking me to pay him back in full immediately. I think that's a pretty dog act and could use that money to pay off my credit card. He is now threatening to sue me for the money. He offered because he didn't want to go on the holiday alone. What can I do?" Nate, Queensland. Response The agreement between you and your friend is a contract. Even if the agreement wasn't made in writing, this personal loan is enforceable under the law. Your friend is the creditor and you are the debtor. Whether the agreement was written or verbal, the specifics you both agreed upon, such as the repayment period of one year, are key. Therefore, any text messages, emails, or other forms of communication that outline the terms, will be helpful. In particular, any correspondence that states how often repayments need to be made and whether your friend can call upon the full payment of the debt within the loan period, will be very useful. It is important to document all discussions you are having with your friend about the repayment as they will be invaluable if your friend brings legal a revised repayment plan might also be a viable solution. For instance, you could offer to make a partial lump sum payment now, using a portion of your winnings, and continue with a repayment schedule for the remainder. This too might assist in maintaining your friendship. Ultimately if your friend chooses to 'sue' you that would be in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). If this occurs, you will be served with a claim document which details the debt, any evidence your friend has to support the claim and details of the amount he is trying to recover. You will then be required to respond in 'defence' of the claim. If you don't, QCAT may determine the matter without you and order that you repay the full debt. You don't need a solicitor to represent you at QCAT and a local community legal centre may be able to provide you with some free advice. Ultimately, whether you have grounds to avoid repaying the loan in full will turn on what was agreed on when your friend loaned you the money, and what evidence there is to prove this. This legal information is general in nature and should not be regarded as specific legal advice. If you need legal advice, you should consult a solicitor.
Yahoo
22-03-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Surgeon fined over Nazi penis pic
An orthopaedic surgeon has been reprimanded and fined $10,000 after sharing a photo of a comatose patient's penis, which was tattooed with a swastika, on WhatsApp. The surgeon, whose name has been suppressed, was treating the man in a regional Queensland hospital in April 2019 after a homemade pipe-bomb exploded in his hands. The man was placed in intensive care where he was intubated and in a coma for a week, during which he was treated by the doctor who was employed by the hospital. While undergoing treatment, the surgeon 'noticed the swastika tattoo and photographed it', a finding by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal states. The surgeon proceeded to share the photo with other treating practitioners on WhatsApp 'or a similar platform', which had 'no clinical or medical purpose'. A notification was made to the Office of the Health Ombudsman in December 2019, with a subsequent investigation being referred to the medical tribunal. In his decision, Tribunal member Peter Murphy SC said the surgeon's unprofessional conduct was serious, but that he 'immediately regretted' taking the photo. 'The patient was unconscious and particularly vulnerable,' Mr Murphy said. 'The trust reposed by the patient in his treating doctors can be seen to be particularly acute in those circumstances.' The Medical Board of Australia submitted to the Tribunal that the doctor should be suspended from practise for six months and have a mentoring condition attached. In his ruling, Mr Murphy instead ruled that a finding of misconduct was sufficient and fined the surgeon $10,000. Criminal proceedings were brought against the doctor, but were dismissed after he agreed with the patient to a 'private arrangement' at a restorative justice conference. The surgeon, referred to in the decision as Doctor A, told the tribunal he had been 'subjected to racism in various forms' throughout his life in Australia. 'It has caused him significant distress, manifesting in him ultimately changing his name formally,' Mr Murphey said. The tribunal member said the appearance of the swastika on the man's penis 'triggered feelings of shock and offence'. 'He understood the swastika to represent racism and to be derogatory of people with his ethnic origins,' he said. Mr Murphy said the surgeon was also facing considerable stress within the public health system at the time of the incident. The doctor has since resigned from the hospital and in the five years since the incident complaint was made has returned to private practise.
