Victorian Schoolteachers to fight Covid jab mandate

Two teachers challenging the state’s “no jab, no job” mandate will have their case heard in the Supreme Court.

Two teachers who are challenging the Victorian government’s mandatory coronavirus vaccines will face trial within weeks.

The Supreme Court will run a hearing into the “no jab, no job” orders from October 25 – a week after they come into effect on October 18.

Teachers Belinda Cetnar and Jack Cetnar claim to have been “adversely affected” by the government’s plan — which requires all school staff to have a first vaccination by October 18, and a second jab by November 29 — if they want to return to the classroom.

Mrs Cetnar is a casual relief teacher and Mr Cetnar is a horticulturalist teacher.

Jack and Belinda Cetnar, teachers who are fighting the Victorian Government's vaccination mandate, pictured in an image from Facebook.

Mrs Cetnar worked as a law clerk at KM Law in Korumburra, South Gippsland until June this year.

According to her LinkedIn, she is now studying a Juris Doctor law degree at RMIT, set to finish next year.

The pair represented themselves during a directions hearing on Tuesday morning, where they were ordered to file an amended writ.

That was because the pair filed their application for an urgent injunction over the vaccinations on the day the state government’s mandatory jab orders were made, meaning their action had already been “overtaken by events”.

Justice Melinda Richards told the court she was keen to list the trial on October 18 – the day the mandate comes into play – because “the matter needs early attention and early intervention”.

“The directions will have consequences for both of you as early as the 18th of October,” she said.

Acting chief health officer Benjamin Cowie made the mandatory vaccine orders under emergency powers of the Health and Wellbeing Act. Picture: Andrew Henshaw

But Justice Richards set the hearing down a week later, determining that the pair needed time to amend their writ, which is expected to add acting chief health officer Benjamin Cowie as a defendant after he made the orders under the emergency powers of the Health and Wellbeing Act.

Justice Richards questioned why the Cetnars had included material in their writ on the Commonwealth biosecurity act, or on civil conscription, but affirmed the case under the Victorian Charter of Human Rights.

Justice Richards made an offer to refer the couple’s case to the bar’s pro bono scheme for legal representation, stating that the issues they raised were “sufficiently important I’d be willing to do that”.

“It’s a big decision,” Mr Cetnar said to his wife during the online hearing, which was at one time watched by 2000 people.

Mrs Cetnar told the court they would consider the offer, but were seeking counsel.

Barrister Sarala Fitzgerald, for the State of Victoria, said there would be “other occupation groups” affected by the case.

She told the court there was a lot on the plates of the experts who would be called, particularly Prof Cowie who was set to be the defendant.

“He is at the moment trying to steer this ship over the next three months through those goalposts to have us all in our homes at Christmas with 30 guests,” Ms Fitzgerald said.

But Justice Richards replied that the jab directions had been made and “I don’t expect your clients will be starting from scratch”.

“If they were starting from scratch, I expect you’d have a very big problem,” Her Honour said.

The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission is considering whether to intervene in the case.