Former aflw player deni varnhagen loses covid19 vaccine mandate challenge court news 20221115 p5ymer.html – Breaking News & Latest Updates 2026
Advertisement
Advertisement
This was published 3 years ago

Former AFLW player loses final COVID-19 vaccine mandate appeal

Tim Dornin and AAP

Powered by

Former Adelaide Crows player Deni Varnhagen has lost her final court challenge to South Australia's COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

In a unanimous judgment on Tuesday, the South Australian Court of Appeal rejected the arguments seeking to overturn an earlier decision from a Supreme Court judge.

Varnhagen, who is also a nurse, took her case to the SA Supreme Court last year after a declaration under the state's Emergency Management Act required her to be vaccinated to work in the health system.

Advertisement

READ MORE: Christmas tree scam warning over dodgy Facebook sellers

Deni Varnhagen has been moved to Adelaide's inactive list after refusing to get a COVID-19 vaccine.

Former Adelaide Crows player Deni Varnhagen has lost her final court challenge to South Australia's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Getty

Her decision not to get the jab also resulted in the Crows placing her on their inactive list last season because of the AFL's requirements for all players to be fully vaccinated.

The league removed that requirement in July this year.

In a judgment in September Justice Judy Hughes found that after SA's emergency declaration in relation to the pandemic was removed earlier this year, Varnhagen's case became hypothetical and lacked utility.

READ MORE: Australian-born boy faces deportation because of his condition

In those circumstances, she said the action was dismissed.

Justice Hughes also ruled against Varnhagen on key questions of law related to the transfer of the vaccine requirements for health workers into public health laws.

Advertisement

She said that transfer, enacted by the SA parliament, was valid.

In its ruling on Tuesday, the appeal court agreed and said there was no defect in what the parliament had approved.

Varnhagen was initially joined in her action by five other people, another nurse, a childcare worker, a teacher and two police officers.

But only one of those, fellow nurse Courtney Millington, continued with the case.

Advertisement
Advertisement

During the Supreme Court hearings, Varnhagen argued that she was not able to make an informed decision regarding the effectiveness or the safety of any of the three COVID-19 vaccines available.

"I believe that, because of the directions, I am being left with no choice as to whether I receive a COVID-19 vaccine," she contended.

READ MORE: Mum furious after Optus brings back pain of son's death

"I believe that I am being coerced into doing so in order to keep my employment."

Advertisement

The intensive care nurse told the court that she had not worked at Adelaide's Flinders Medical Centre since November last year and had taken a job as a labourer to meet her expenses.

Millington received one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine but decided not to have a second after suffering an adverse reaction.

She sought an exemption on medical grounds, but it was refused.

The case will return to court in December for the consideration of costs.

email icon

Contact us

Share a tip-off, video or photo with us

Most viewed in Australia

More to explore