A group of people who went to court over COVID-19 measures including the vaccine have been slapped with more than $200,000 in legal costs after failing to prove their claims.
The group was led by NSW woman Cienna Knowles, who gained attention by claiming she was “non-consensually double-vaccinated” and hospitalised as a result of adverse side-effects, losing her job and other opportunities.
The group also included business owners who said they were unable to operate due to pandemic restrictions, and a government worker and a health professional who alleged their livelihoods were affected.
Another claimant, Alison Zerk, said she fled the Northern Territory to escape COVID restrictions and ended up homeless.
In a Federal Court lawsuit, the group claimed COVID-19 restrictions were constitutionally invalid, were a breach of duty of care and of the Fair Work Act, and contravened the Consumer Act section stating a service must be suppled with “due care and skill”.
In dismissing the case in June, Justice Debra Mortimer said it had many flaws.
“Their case is a general attack on the government response across Australia to the COVID-19 pandemic through the use of a vaccination program,” she said.
“In a likely complex and resource-intensive case such as this, the court must be able to identify the material facts pleaded to support the allegation, or some probative basis in the primary material for the contentions.
“Counsel for the applicants did not even attempt to point the court towards one.”
