Jade came to the Bar in 2016.  Prior to this, Jade had more than a decade of experience in commercial litigation, most recently as a Senior Associate in a top tier national firm.

Jade has a commercial practice with a particular focus on regulatory and enforcement matters, including civil penalty proceedings, and also employment and industrial-related matters, including anti-discrimination and sexual harassment. She also acts in a broad range of commercial disputes.

Jade is briefed to appear as advocate at all levels of the State Courts and various tribunals, including regular appearances in the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission. She has also appeared in various matters in the Federal Court, Federal Circuit Court and Fair Work Commission.

Jade has been recognised annually in Doyle’s Guide as a Leading Employment Barrister since 2024.

Recent notable cases include:

• BA DC FE v State of Queensland [2026] QCAT 298: Led by Chris Murdoch KC. This matter involved a discrimination and human rights claim by three juvenile applicants in respect of various periods of detention in the 12 month period between June 2021 – June 2022. The applicants were unsuccessful in each of their indirect discrimination claims, but succeeded in respect of some aspects of the alleged human rights contraventions. Declarations and apologies were ordered.
• Benjamin v Sharp & Ors (No 2) [2026] QIRC 117: Successful application striking out the entirety of the applicant’s statement of facts and contentions in respect of her reprisal claim.
• Balmain Dental Clinic Pty Ltd ATF Dentist & Co Trust v Commissioner of Taxation [2026] ARTA 895: Acted on behalf of the Commissioner of Taxation. The central issue concerned whether an oral health therapist was an employee pursuant to the extended meaning of that term in s 12(3) of the Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act 1992 (Cth), and therefore entitled to be paid superannuation. This involved consideration of whether the oral health therapist was engaged ‘wholly or principally for her labour‘. The Tribunal found that she was and affirmed the decision of the Commissioner that superannuation was payable.
• Mohr-Edgar v State of Queensland (Legal Aid Queensland) [2026] ICQ 2: Successfully defended an appeal against a costs order obtained against the appellant at first instance in respect of a discrimination complaint which she brought against the respondent and then sought to discontinue shortly prior to the final hearing.
• Smith v Chief Executive, Department of Justice and Attorney-General, Office of Fair Trading & Anor [2026] QCATA 83: Successfully defended an appeal against a decision allowing a claim against the claim fund in respect of misleading and deceptive conduct by motor deal agents under the Motor Dealers and Chattel Auctioneers Act 2016 (Qld).
• Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Bundaberg Indoor Sports Pty Ltd (No 2) [2025] FCA 1656: Summary judgment obtained against taxpayers for tax related liabilities (including general interest charges and penalties) in the amounts of $35,034,116.95 and $24,474,117.95 respectively. The matter also involved successfully obtaining urgent ex parte freezing orders against the assets of the taxpayers: Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Bundaberg Indoor Sports Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 1104.
• Ryan v Transurban Ltd [2024] FCA 994: Obtained suppression orders in respect of a matter concerning alleged contraventions of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth).
• He v Secretary, Department of Education, Skills and Employment [2024] FCA 819; He v Secretary, Department of Education, Skills and Employment (2023) 377 FLR 161: Administrative law matter which turned on the meaning of the expression ‘incurred a liability to pay‘ within the meaning of s 44(1)(c) of the A New Tax System (Family Assistance) Act 1999 (Cth).
• Wang v Commissioner of Taxation [2024] FCA 585: Successfully defeated the taxpayer’s application to the Federal Court seeking to overturn the Tribunal decision affirming the Commissioner of Taxation’s default assessments. The taxpayer claimed that the default assessments were excessive in circumstances where the taxpayer asserted that he had earned no income in Australia during the relevant period. The application to the Federal Court involved issues of whether the taxpayer had effectively discharged his onus of proof in s 14ZZK(b)(i) of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth), as well as the application of the rule in Browne v Dunn, whether the Tribunal had given adequate reasons as required by s 43(2B) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth), whether the Tribunal had failed to give due weight to corroborative evidence and whether the Tribunal had erred in its discretion to refuse to admit new evidence.
• Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Bettles [2023] FCA 975: Led by Paul McQuade KC. This was a complex action brought by ASIC under s 45-1 of the Insolvency Practice Schedule (Corporations). ASIC alleged that Mr Bettles, a liquidator, was directly and accessorily liable for various breaches of director’s duties under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), as well as alleged liquidator’s duties at common law. ASIC sought the cancellation of Mr Bettles’ registration as a liquidator and a lifetime prohibition on applying for registration. The application was dismissed in its entirety.
• Loveridge v State of Queensland (Queensland Ambulance Service) (No 2) [2023] QIRC 207: Successfully defended a reinstatement application by an Advanced Care Paramedic who was dismissed for serious misconduct following a disciplinary process where it was found the paramedic struck an elderly dementia patient across the face whilst securing the patient into a stretcher at an aged care facility.
• Solar Panel Xpress Pty Ltd v Wallandale Pty Ltd & Ors [2021] QDC 31; Solar Panel Xpress Pty Ltd v Wallandale Pty Ltd & Ors [2021] QDC 45: Acted for an accountant in successfully defending a professional negligence and misleading and deceptive conduct claim, and also obtaining an indemnity costs order in respect of the seven days of trial.
• Tax Practitioners Board v Hacker [2020] FCA 1047; Tax Practitioners Board v Hacker (No 2) [2020] FCA 1047; Tax Practitioners Board v Hacker (No 3) [2020] FCA 1814: Civil penalty prosecution involving more than 3000 alleged instances of providing unregistered tax agent services and unregistered BAS services for fee or reward in breach of the Tax Agent Services Act 2009 (Cth), and a related contempt proceeding involving 28 charges of contempt. More recently, Jade also acted in a subsequent contempt proceeding involving additional charges of contempt: Tax Practitioners Board v Hacker (No 4) [2021] FCA 940.
• Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Bettles [2020] FCA 1568: Led by Paul Freeburn QC, acting for Mr Bettles, a liquidator, in successfully obtaining an order to strike out the entirety of the Concise Statement and Supplementary Concise Statement filed by ASIC.
• Saric v Commonwealth (2018) 206 FCR 469: Led by Mark McCarthy, in which a declaration was sought on behalf of Mr Saric that the automatic forfeiture of his vessel by the Commonwealth under s 261A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) was invalid, and orders were sought for the recovery of the vessel. The success of the application relied on being able to establish certain defences under the Migration Act 1958 and the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) including ‘stress of weather’ and ‘sudden or extraordinary emergency’.

Jade has lectured in Evidence at Bond University and Civil Procedure at Griffith University, and is invited to guest lecture from time to time on advocacy-related topics.

Jade is a strong supporter of the pro bono work undertaken by Caxton Legal Centre, LawRight and Women’s Legal Service and accepts briefs through these organisations.