Thread by @karenlsweeney

Novak Djokovic has won plenty of battles on the court, but today's a test of his skills in the courtroom. Or his lawyers skills. Anyway, here's a little rundown of who is saying what:

Basically the argument is that Novak Djokovic tested positive for COVID-19 on December 16, 2021. He says under the ATAGI advice that exempts him from being vaccinated for six months.

This, from the ATAGI advice, is what he relies on:

“COVID-19 vaccination in people who have had PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection can be deferred for a maximum of six months after the acute illness as a temporary exemption due to acute major medical illness.”

But the delegate (the person making the decision to cancel his visa on behalf of Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews) says “previous infection with COVID-19 is not considered a medical contraindication for COVID-19 vaccination in Australia”.

Djokovic disputes that. The commonwealth disputes him.

They say the ATAGI advice is also that “people with laboratory confirmation of a past infection can start their vaccination course … as soon as they have recovered from symptomatic infection”.

They don’t end there though, but hammer home in their submissions that a “contraindication to vaccination” and a “deferral” are completely different.

“Further still, there is no suggestion that the applicant had ‘acute major medical illness’ in December 2021. All he has said is the he tested positive for COVID-19. That is not the same."

If you want to read the submissions for yourself, they've been posted online by the court here:
fcfcoa.gov.au/migration-law/…

Or for more fun times (seriously, name one thing more exciting than a Federal Circuit Court hearing 🤓) you can watch it here: secure.quickchannel.com/qc/create/main…

For even more fun times, check out my story for @AAPNewswire here: aap.com.au/news/djokovic-…

And while you're here, why not support great, independent journalism by my talented and passionate colleagues because #aapneedsyou

gofundme.com/f/aap-needs-you