Kent Blore

Kent was admitted as a lawyer in the Supreme Court of Queensland in 2011 and successfully completed the Bar Practice Course in 2018. He has a keen interest in the implied freedom of political communication, the Kable principle and human rights law.

Kent appears in court as junior counsel in human rights and constitutional matters in the High Court, Queensland Court of Appeal, Supreme Court and Federal Court.

Since joining Crown Law in 2015, Kent has undertaken three secondments to Strategic Policy within the Department of Justice and Attorney-General, including to assist in the review of the Criminal Organisation Act 2009 (Qld).

Prior to Crown Law, Kent was a Senior Associate to Justice Bell of the Victorian Supreme Court and an Associate to Chief Judge Wolfe of the District Court of Queensland.

Other notable experience includes Kent’s work as an Intern with the United Nations Assistance to the Khmer Rouge Trials from September to December 2010. During this time he worked in the Pre-Trial Chamber to the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia in Phnom Penh, established to try those most responsible for international and national crimes committed during 1975-79.

Kent has published a number of academic articles in law journals. His most recent articles include:

• K Blore, ‘Six unexplored aspects of proportionality under human rights legislation in Australia’ (2022) 105 AIAL Forum 42
• K Blore, ‘Proportionality under the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld): When Are the Factors in s 13(2) Necessary and Sufficient, and When Are They Not?’ (2022) 45(2) Melbourne University Law Review 419
• K Blore and B Booth-Marxson, ‘Breathing Life into the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld): The Ethical Duties of Public Servants and Lawyers Acting for Government’ (2022) 41(1) University of Queensland Law Journal 1
• K Blore and N Nibbs, ‘A Theory of the Right to Property under the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld)’ (2022) 30 Australian Property Law Journal 1
• K Blore, ‘The riddle of s 5(2)(a) of the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld): When are courts and tribunals required to apply human rights directly?’ (2021) 102 AIAL Forum 71.

Kent’s experience includes:

• appearing as counsel in SDCV v Director-General of Security [2022] HCA 32 (Ch III of the Constitution)
• appearing as counsel in Farm Transparency International Ltd v New South Wales [2022] HCA 23 (implied freedom of political communication)
• appearing as counsel in Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v Grant [No 2] [2022] QSC 252 (interaction between Human Rights Act 2019 and Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003)
• appearing as counsel in Wood v The King [2022] QSC 216 (referral to Supreme Court under 49 of the Human Rights Act)
• appearing as counsel in SQH v Scott (2022) 10 QR 215 (human rights challenge to exercise of coercive questioning powers)
• appearing as counsel in TRKJ v Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) (2021) 9 QR 472 (human rights compatibility of protected counselling records provisions)
• appearing as counsel in Owen-D’Arcy v Chief Executive, Queensland Corrective Services (2021) 910 QR 250 (judicial review of a maximum-security order, raising human rights grounds)
• appearing as counsel in Palmer v Western Australia (2021) 272 CLR 505 (Western Australia’s COVID-19 border restrictions)
• appearing as counsel in Innes v Electoral Commission of Queensland [No 2] (2020) 5 QR 623 (challenge to local government election raising grounds under the Human Rights Act 2019)
• appearing as counsel in Vickers v Queensland Building and Construction Commission [2019] QCA 66 (extraterritoriality)
• instructing the Solicitor‐General in major High Court litigation including McCloy v New South Wales (2015) 257 CLR 178, Brown v Tasmania (2017) 261 CLR 328, Unions NSW v New South Wales (2019) 264 CLR 595, Clubb v Edwards; Preston v Avery (2019) 267 CLR 171, Spence v Queensland (2019) 268 CLR 355, and Vella v Commissioner of Police (NSW) (2019) 269 CLR 219
• providing legal advice to government in the context of the development of human rights legislation.