For those interested in these matters, below is a brief summary of the findings of the Federal Court.

 

Essentially, DNA and Rafferty argued that Finkelstein J (the trial judge) made an error in his judgement, in that it was
not possible for his honour to determine what the 'characteristic' of an ordinary or reasonable recipient of the DNA
notice would be, and whether such ordinary or reasonable recipient could have been misled or deceived by the notice,
without admissible evidence being introduced about the 'characteristic' of these recipients.  

 

The Full Federal Court of Australia (comprising Wilcox, Heerey and R D Nicholson JJ) found that the question of whether
the recipients of the DNA notices were misled or deceived is not a matter to be proved by evidence - it is a question
for the judge to decide.  The Full Federal Court dismissed DNA and Rafferty's appeal of Finkelstein's decision, and
ordered DNA and Rafferty to pay auDA's costs in the appeal.

 

Regards,

 

 

Chris Disspain

CEO - auDA

ceo§auda.org.au

www.auda.org.au