CAMPAIGN PAUSED The Australian Babies Case

Campaign Created by: Maat's Method & PJ O'Brien & Associates

The funds from this campaign will be received by PJ O'Brien & Associates.

Goal: AUD $100,000
Raised: AUD $ 82,272

Australian Babies and Infants need Our Voices and Our Protection from an Experimental 'Vaccine' Program Gone Too Far


On 19 July 2022 the Therapeutic Goods Administration granted provisional approval to Moderna for use of its product (Spikevax) in children aged 6 months to 5 years old in Australia.


Being provisionally approved means this injectable is still the subject of human clinical trials for determining whether they are truly safe and effective. That human clinical trial now seeks to include the Babies and Infants of Australia. At no time in human history have governments ever before allowed their entire populations to be subjected to experimental clinical trials, with largely untested and unknown drugs, yet this is exactly what has been occurring with the Covid-19 injectables. Despite these Covid-19 injectables continuing to report historically unprecedented numbers of deaths, adverse events, and long-term side-effects, Australian authorities refuse to remove them from the market, even though the number of reported deaths and adverse events from the Covid-19 injectables, far exceed the number of deaths considered to be "due to" Covid.

This is despite the fact that the science is clear:


·         Covid-19 poses a statistically negligible risk to children (see and;, among many other such studies); and

·         The Moderna vaccine presents significant risk to those to whom it is administered (see and and, among many other such studies)

In these circumstances, provisionally approving the Moderna injectable for this age group is inappropriate and unethical.


But it is also unlawful; the Secretary of the Department of Health can only extend the provisional approval of a medicine to a new age group if "an indication of the medicine is the treatment, prevention or diagnosis of a life-threatening or seriously debilitating condition". That is clearly not the case here, as there is no clinical evidence to show Covid-19 is life-threatening or causes seriously debilitating outcomes in babies and infants aged 6 months to 5 years old. However, once being administered this experimental injectable, these children will be exposed to a significant risk of suffering an adverse event from the injectable, including possible death. We therefore seek to challenge the decision in Court.

Approaching the High Court

The applicants in this case are seeking to avert a real risk of harm to human life, and in particular, to the life of children. In Australia, only an applicant who has "standing" can bring a case to court. This means that an applicant needs to have the legal authority to bring a case; they need to show that they have a "special interest" in the matter and that they are truly "a person aggrieved" by the decision that has been made. In this case, based on what has happened in previous cases, we believe that the Federal Court is unlikely to grant the applicants standing. So instead, we're going straight to the High Court instead, with one primary argument:

An interest in preserving human life is the ultimate special interest, and our case must be allowed to proceed.

Then, if the High Court agrees, the door will be open for us to present the evidence and data to show that the provisional approvals must immediately be halted in Australia.

And, although this is an Australian case, a win here will reverberate around the world.


By Donating to this Cause you Agree to the following Terms and Conditions:


  1. Monies donated to this cause will be used to meet the legal and related costs of proceedings to be issued in the High Court and/or the Federal Court of Australia.The applicants in this matter will be regularly updated as to the specific use of funds donated to this matter, and may choose to instruct the legal team to update the donors accordingly. Two advices have already been obtained from Senior Counsel which have confirmed there are some prospects of success. Senior Counsel along with a junior barrister and a legal team consisting of two instructing solicitors will run this case. 

  2. As always in litigation, there is no guarantee of success. By donating money into this fund you agree that you are not entitled to a refund at any time, irrespective of whether the case proceeds, succeeds, fails or changes its scope or direction.

  3. The applicants who are bringing this case are doing so in their individual capacity as concerned citizens. The government has a lot more money than the applicants. In the event of an adverse costs order being made against the applicants or otherwise, money from this fund may be used to cover such order/s made in favour of the government.

  4. Please note that your contribution will be a donation which will be paid directly to a solicitor’s trust account and allocated entirely to the running of this case. Other than for internal administration purposes, the name of a donor will not be made known or publicly released unless otherwise advised by the donor.

  5. Any donations made via the Give Send Go platform will incur a 3.5% service fee plus 30 cents US per transaction that will be deducted from your donation. The balance after this deduction will be the amount received in the trust account, and is what your receipt will reflect.

  6. The case has several phases: First, we prepare and file a case in the High Court to clarify and settle the question of standing; and urgently in light of the evidence in support. Then, if successful, we proceed to substantive hearing where our substantive evidence can be heard.

  7. The applicants have engaged law firms Maat’s Method and PJ O’Brien & Associates in this matter. All monies donated will go direct to the trust account of PJ O’Brien & Associates.

  8. PJ O’Brien & Associates will only pay over, transfer or disburse monies from that trust account fund for invoiced legal (and related) costs, expert fees, and related expenses or disbursements that have been reasonably and properly incurred.

  9. If at the completion or cessation (for whatever reason) of the proceedings (which may include appellate proceedings) there are monies exceeding AU$10,000 remaining in the trust account (i.e. surplus funds), donors who have contributed an amount greater than $1000 will be given the opportunity to elect to receive a pro rata return from the surplus funds. Any funds remaining after such pro rata return may be spent on uncharged legal fees.



Update #5
March 16, 2023
facebook twitter

Today the Hight Court has unilaterally decided to remit this case to the Federal Court of Australia because it contains significant case management and fact finding which would "unduly divert the Court away from its principle functions". We will provide further information in the coming days. In the meantime, due to a functionality limitation on Give Send Go we cannot 'pause' the ability to donate on this campaign. Until we provide a further update, please DO NOT DONATE to this campaign.

Update #4
January 31, 2023
facebook twitter

I am one of the lawyers working on this case, and the solicitor on the record. In the past week, we have had two separate people file applications in the High Court seeking to intervene in the matter. One of those intervenors, Toni Reihani, has his own cases against the TGA on foot and is trying to ask the Court to consider his cases at the same time as ours. However, Mr Reihani’s cases are totally unrelated to ours, and his application to intervene is therefore inappropriate. He would be better off applying for a ‘stay’, or pause, in his matters until ours is finalised, at which point he can benefit from the new special interest we are seeking if it is granted.

The other, William Bay, is asking the Court to dispense with our case, or to remit it to the Federal Court. This is because he says that the new special interest that we are seeking could result in private parties misusing it to, for example, force medical procedures on others.

When William first sought to intervene in our case, and before we had seen his application or affidavit, I called him to ask why he was doing what he was doing. During that conversation, I told William that his intervention might encourage the High Court to remit the case to the Federal Court, where our chances of success were lower.

We have now seen William’s application and affidavit, however, which we consider to be based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the law. The Court will recognise this very quickly, and deal with the application accordingly.

We will continue to keep you updated. For now, the defendant’s response to our application is due on 8 February, at which stage, an initial directions hearing will thereafter be scheduled. 

- Instructing Solicitor, Peter Fam

Update #3
December 21, 2022
facebook twitter

On Tuesday 20 December 2022, we filed our case in the High Court of Australia.


This is a great step – our case is now on the record and we await confirmation from the Court of a first case management hearing. Our application makes clear the urgency of the matter and we will continue to press for the case to be dealt with on that basis.


Thank you to all of our generous donors as well as those who have offered your affirmations, prayers and support. We greatly appreciate you all. We will continue to keep you updated and wish you all a happy Christmas and New Years period.

The Legal Team 

Update #2
December 12, 2022
facebook twitter

We have good news on several fronts.

Commencing Proceedings

Last week, we sent the Secretary of the Department of Health, Brendan Murphy, a letter of demand. The letter gives him 7 days to respond and warns him that, if he doesn’t, we will file in the High Court of Australia.

If we don’t receive a substantive response by the deadline today, 13 December 2022, we will file this case.

We have the funding we need to file and begin proceedings

Two additional major donors have made direct and substantial contributions which assure that that we have enough money to file and run this matter. We have significantly reduced the target to account for these contributions. We extend our sincere gratitude to the community at large who have stepped up to assist our babies and toddlers in this very important case. We remain grateful to Parents with Questions, Children’s Health Defence (US), the AVN, Health Alliance Australia, Mark Neugebauer, Graham Hood and John Larter, Maria Zeee, and the Australian Medical Professionals Society (AMPS), who have all been very generous in hosting us on their platforms to help us spread the word and secure community support. It has been a real team effort. 

Moving forward, we will only be raising a nominal further amount to cover the many contingencies that arise in litigation, and for having funds on hand to file the rest of the pleadings/cases we have already prepared in the event we prove successful before the High Court.

For reasons of strategy, practicality and cost, the case we are filing focusses only on the provisional approval of Moderna for 6 month old to less than 6 year old babies/toddlers. However, we have pleadings prepared for all of the other provisional approvals for all other 'vaccines' and age groups, where with success with this case in the High Court, the Secretary should have no choice but to settle those cases/decisions also. This is because the legal errors in one decision (the Moderna Babies Decision) are applicable to all of them.

However, noting that the Secretary refuses to admit the unprecedented deaths and injuries caused by these 'vaccines', even with success in the High Court with the Moderna Babies Decision, we still may need to formally file all of our other similiar pleadings/cases in the Federal Court of Australia before the Secretary agrees to discuss withdrawing these 'vaccines' for all older age groups. That is why we continue to raise the nominal further amount.

Next Steps

We expect to file the matter on Tuesday the 13th of December 2022. We will provide confirmation of that once it occurs. We then expect the Court to schedule a first return (an initial case management hearing) soon afterwards, and hopefully on this side of Christmas.

Thank you all for your assistance, generosity and integrity. We are now on the cusp of battle, and we’re happy and humbled to be standing here with you all.

Update #1
October 24, 2022
facebook twitter

We have recently reduced the campaign target from $250,000 to $181,000 thanks to a generous private donation by an international organisation. The figure of $181,000 is our current estimate of additional monies required to run the entirety of the matter before the High Court. We note that an initial figure of $108,000 is required before we have the funds necessary to file the matter in Court. We are currently working hard to prepare and finalise the evidence and documentation for this case. Once that figure is reached, and our preparation is complete, we will do so.


Click the Pray button to let the campaign owner know you are praying for them.