User:Domogrady/sandbox

Since its inception in 1982, the not-for-profit Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) has used litigation and advocacy to achieve systemic change on public interest issues. The adverse effects of an inter-uterine device known as the Dalkon Shield was PIAC's first significant public interest issue. In 1986, the organisation assisted 1,700 applicants with their liability claims against Dalkon Shield. This Australian action constituted the single largest number of claims made against Dalkon Shield outside the USA. (source: PIAC 25 years, p 11). PIAC’s litigation practice continues to identify and pursue legal claims that will determine, enforce or clarify important rights or public interest issues. These issues include disability access, homelessness, Indigenous justice, unlawful detention, and discrimination. In 2010-11, PIAC ran test case claims under the Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002 (Cth) in relation to taxis and buses. The organisation also launched a class action claiming unlawful imprisonment by the state of NSW on behalf of young people wrongly detained for breach of bail. PIAC has also acted in coronial inquests relating to deaths in custody; and has pursued freedom of information appeals seeking access to information about Australia’s military practices in Iraq and Afghanistan. On the issue of sexuality discrimination, PIAC has tested the religious bodies exemption in the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 (NSW) via a case concerning same-sex couples and foster care services. In 2010-11, PIAC made a successful application to have costs capped pursuant to Order 62A of the Federal Court Rules (Cth) in Haraksin v Murrays Australia Ltd, a disability discrimination matter against the coach company, Murrays Australia Limited, based on its alleged failure to provide wheelchair accessible coaches. The substantive claim is made pursuant to the Disability Standards for Accessible Public Transport 2002 (Cth). The court ordered that the maximum costs that either side could recover were $25,000. Without such an order, the applicant, Julie Haraksin, would not have been in a position to proceed with the litigation. PIAC continues to call for reform to the law regarding costs in public interest litigation. This has involved PIAC contributing a number of submissions to government inquiries, as well as broader advocacy. For instance, in September 2010, PIAC presented a paper on litigation costs and strategies for the public interest lawyer at the Public Interest Law: Opportunities and Obstacles conference hosted by Melbourne Law School and others. PIAC’s first class action since the Homefund case is an important development. Together with law firm Maurice Blackburn, PIAC is addressing the public interest issue of the unlawful detention of young people by pursuing a class action against the state of NSW. rocedure to address the public interest issue of the unlawful detention of young people.