On 25 March 2022, the Changhua District Court sentenced an individual to 50 days in prison (suspended for two years) and to a fine of NT$ 20,000 (US$ 698), for having violated a solitary confinement order during hospitalization for contracting COVID-19, at a hospital in Changhua.
An individual requested the person requested the Federal Commission for the Protection of Health Risks (Cofepris) to provide the document in which the biopharmaceutical company which produced the vaccine stated that a second shot is required after 6 months from the first shot.
On 20 February 2022, the Social Court of North Rhine-Westphalia (AZ: L 19 AS 1236/21) rejected the claim of a ‘Hartz IV’ welfare recipient demanding 20 FFP2 masks per week or a monthly payment of 129 euros to their employer.
On 31 March 2022, the Supreme Court accepted the appeal of three candidates to obtain a new exam test and the modification of the age limits for participation in the exam for access to public services of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).
On 23 March 2022, the Administrative Court of First Instance of Monastir accepted the urgent appeal of employees against the administrative provision of the Governor of the Education of Al Mahdya which required the suspension from work because they did not have a COVID-19 vaccination pass (see joint cases n.6200461 n.6200464 and n.6200465).
The Attorney General and the Prosecutor’s Office of the State of São Paulo filed a public civil action requesting the restoration of the Bom Prato program, which offers free meals people without a house. The plaintiffs alleged that the service was interrupted on 30 September 2020 due to the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and that, by injunction of 22 October 2020, another judge had already ordered that the service be resumed.
On 30 March 2022, the Court of First Instance of Hong Kong rejected the appeal of a claimant opposed to the vaccination program, which was introduced in February 2022 for access to a series of premises including courts, restaurants, supermarkets.
The case concerned an application to certain the unlawfulness of the several provisions of the Austrian COVID-19 protection regulation (COVID-19-SchuMaV). According to those rules, people were prohibited from taking part in some aspects of social and cultural life, such as visiting a museum or a theatre, or going to a hairdresser, if they had not recovered or been vaccinated (the so-called 2G rule).
In January and February 2022, Virginia passed legislation which provides that parents can opt their children out of masking requirements in Virginia's schools, even if the school or district has otherwise determined mandatory masking to be an appropriate COVID-19 prevention measure.
On 14 February 2022, the Kuala Lumpur Labor Court (case no. 14/4-2988/20) ruled that the dismissal of an employee should be the last step in cost-cutting measures and, although the financial constraints stemming from the pandemic could result in outright dismissal, employers must still carry out resizing with due process.
In January 2021, the House of Representatives enacted a mask mandate in order to ensure the protection of Members’ and staff’s safety and health.
The plaintiff filed a writ of preventive habeas corpus (habeas corpus preventivo) against Decree no. 56.120/2021 by the State Government of Rios Grande do Sul which required proof of vaccination against COVID-19 for people to be able to circulate and stay in public and private spaces.
On 10 March 2022, the High Court of Taipei confirmed the first instance sentence to one year in prison, with a suspended sentence for three years and a fine, for the manager of the company who had increased the price of alcohol by almost 10 times during the pandemic, falsely claiming that this increase was determined by the price of the raw material, which however remained unchanged.
On 9 March 2022, the Spanish Supreme Court (resolución n°220/2022) annulled the conviction for disobedience imposed on an individual which several times infringed the prohibition to go out into the streets during the declaration of the state of alarm, against orders from the police imposing lockdowns.
Several Michigan-based restaurants which hold a commercial property insurance policy brought a case against Cincinnati Insurance Company, arguing that they were entitled to reimbursement for the loss incurred on account of the business interruption caused by the COVID-19 outbreak and related stay-at-home orders.
On 22 February 2022, the First Instance Tribunal n°3 of León (decision n°35/2022) ordered an insurance company to indemnify the owner of a bar-restaurant due to its closure as a result of the declaration of the state of alarm. The claimant had claimed compensation associated with the guarantee for loss of profits as a result of the closure of its establishment.
Several small businesses holding an insurance policy brought a case against major insurance companies, arguing that the business interruption caused by COVID-19 substantially impacted on the scope and functioning of a number of clauses embedded in their contracts.
On 14 March 2022, the Indian Supreme Court (writ petition no. 607/2021) rejected the appeal filed to obtain the publication and disclosure of the clinical studies carried out on COVID vaccines, with particular regard to Covishield and Covaxin, as well as on the effects adverse events recorded.
On 25 March 2022, the Supreme Court allowed the administration to consider vaccination status of US Navy members while making operational decisions.
On 14 February 2022, the French Council of State rejected claims by an individual that the obligation to be administered a booster shot of the vaccine against COVID-19 was illegal, inter alia in light of the fundamental right of one’s private life (decision n°460891).
The Sicilian administrative court referred to the Constitutional Court the constitutionality question about mandatory vaccination for health care professionals established by the Italian law in 2021.
On 13 October 2020 – under the Trump administration – the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued an order preventing immigrants who potentially had COVID-19 from entering or remaining in the US. In July 2021 and August 2021, the same federal agency – this time under the Biden administration – issued two amended orders excepting unaccompanied alien children from the application of the October 2020 order and ensuing immigration policy.
A disability service provider challenged the legality of an Immediate Modification Order enacted by the Executive in April 2020.
On 12 February 2022, the Indian Supreme Court rejected claims that it should intervene to reduce the time between the administration of two doses of Covishield, a vaccine against COVID-19.
The Legislative branch of Catanduva adopted a law which required the municipal health system to prioritize the vaccination of gravediggers against COVID-19. The Prefecture of Catanduva challenged the measure, claiming that the Head of the Executive was competent to establish the organization and the functions of local administration with regards to essential public services such as health.
On January 14, 2022, the Seoul Administrative Court upheld the appeal filed against the use of vaccination passes for entry to most supermarkets. In particular, the court clarified that supermarkets and shops in Seoul that have at least 3000 square meters or more are exempt from requiring a vaccination pass for entry. In addition, the Court also exempted adolescents from the obligation to present the vaccination pass in the facilities based in Seoul.
On March 3, the Appeals Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation confirmed the previous decision of the Supreme Court, issued as a first court, confirming the legitimacy of the decree imposing the obligation to carry out a PCR test and self-isolation after returning from a trip abroad.
On 28 February 2022, the High Court of Bombay granted the State of Maharashtra more time to decide on whether to allow unvaccinated people to travel by train.
On 11 March 2022, a federal judge held that Amazon.com Services LLC must face the bulk of federal and state wage complaints filed by several warehouse workers, who allege Amazon failed to compensate them for the time spent undergoing mandatory screenings for COVID-19 before the beginning of each of their shifts.
On 8 February, the High Court of Singapore (case no. 636 of 2020) rejected the appeal of a woman who had applied for authorization to testify remotely by video link, due to travel difficulties caused by the restrictions due to the pandemic and to avoid the risk of contracting COVID-19. The claimant had argued that the defendants would not have suffered any prejudice if she had given testimony remotely as they would not be deprived of the opportunity to question her.
On 14 March 2022, the Johannesburg Labor Court rejected the appeal of the employee of a company which had required its workers to vaccinate or provide a weekly negative COVID test to enter work premises.
On 22 February 2022, the Social Division of the Supreme Court (resolución n°168/2022) confirmed the nullity of a collective dismissal that had affected 87 workers of a company producing airplane engines.
On 10 March 2022, the Constitutional Court found that the application of the Covid Safe Ticket (the health pass given access to some places for vaccinated or recovered people) was not likely to cause the applicant serious harm which would be difficult to repair (case 38/2022). The harm claimed is only hypothetical and cannot justify the suspension of the contested measure.
With a judgment of 26 January 2022, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland denied a claim for liquidated damages filed by a class of employees who alleged that their employer had negligently failed to timely meet its payroll obligations for the period March 15-21 of 2020.
On 19 February 2022, the High Court of Calcutta ordered that the ordinary administrative conditions relating to the payment of school and university fees and related services be restored, due to the restoration of lessons and training activities in person, ordered by the government of the State of Bengal in consideration of the remission of COVID-19.
On 15 March 2022, the European Court of Human Rights held that, given the blanket nature and significant length of the Swiss ban on public events during the pandemic, as well as the importance of freedom of peaceful assembly in a democratic society, the measure complained of had not been proportionate to the aims pursued and was thus in breach of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
This project and its database have been made possible with the financial support from the World Health Organization