• Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.

Novak Djokovic allowed to leave Australian detention for court hearing

·3-min read
In this article:
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
  • Novak Djokovic
    Novak Djokovic
    Serbian tennis player

The court hearing Novak Djokovic’s appeal in Melbourne has ruled that the player should be removed from the Park Hotel in Carlton during the hearing, while Judge Anthony Kelly has expressed agitation over the rejection of Djokovic’s medical exemption.

The Federal Circuit Court of Australia is hearing Djokovic’s appeal against a decision to refuse the tennis player a visa ahead of the Australian Open.

The court has published an order that Djokovic be taken from the Park Hotel and brought to “a premises as specified by the applicant’s solicitors” during the hearing.

LIVE: Follow live coverage of Novak Djokovic’s court hearing

The order states: “The respondent, by her servants or agents, including the Australian Border Force, take all steps and do all things as may be necessary to bring the applicant to premises as specified by the applicant’s solicitors on Monday, 10 January 2022 (and each day thereafter, including upon the delivery of judgment), to permit him to remain there until the conclusion of each hearing and to secure his safe return to detention upon the conclusion of each hearing.”

The hearing was delayed by technical issues with the court’s video link, but Djokovic’s lawyers began arguing their case to Judge Kelly, who asked the court “What more could this man have done?” and said he was “agitated” about the issue.

“Here, a professor and an eminently qualified physician have produced and provided to the applicant a medical exemption,” Judge Kelly said.

“Further to that, that medical exemption and the basis on which it was given was separately given by a further independent expert specialist panel established by the Victorian state government and that document was in the hands of the delegate.”

Djokovic’s lawyer, Nicholas Wood, has argued the notice of intention to cancel the visa was defective because it was made on “a confusing blend of two grounds”.

The point I am agitated about is ‘what more could this man have done?’

Judge Anthony Kelly

He also argued that Djokovic was treated at the airport as if access to lawyers “couldn’t possibly” be of assistance in the matter.

It was revealed in court documents submitted by Djokovic’s lawyers that the player had been infected with Covid-19 in December 2021. The documents said the infection was the basis of Djokovic’s medical exemption.

The documents also noted that Djokovic expressed “shock”, “surprise, and “confusion” when he was notified of his visa cancellation “given that (as he understood it) he had done everything he was required to enter Australia”.

But Australia’s Home Affairs Department filed court documents in which it stated “there is no such thing as an assurance of entry by a non-citizen into Australia” and noted that the Minister has the power to cancel Djokovic’s visa a second time if the court rules in his favour.

“As the Court raised with the parties at a previous mention, if this Court were to make orders in the applicant’s favour, it would then be for the respondent to administer the Act in accordance with law. That may involve the delegate deciding whether to make another cancellation decision, but there are also other powers in the Act, as the Court would be aware.”

Our goal is to create a safe and engaging place for users to connect over interests and passions. In order to improve our community experience, we are temporarily suspending article commenting