Sorry, what I was getting at but didn’t really explain at all was that if all of the contradictory statements and guidance, together with the various laws in question leave enough room to allow for the acceptance that he was there lawfully then I don’t think the government/Victoria/AO are going to be able to get lined up in time (or at all) to oppose it properly.
On the matter of fact - is recent past infection an acceptable alternative to vaccination on the quarantine-free visa path. It seems like the answer is a straightforward no.
On the matter of enforcement and due process - it looks like his lawyers have got a case. It looks quite possible that the visa rejection at the border didn't follow the correct procedure. Few official processes stand up to that kind of scrutiny.
I've no idea if the judge would then immediately re-ajudicate on the the visa withdrawal. Presumably not, which would allow the visa to stand, and it would be up to border control to restart the visa withdrawal process.
It's an awful mess. No one looks good. Looks like Djokovic got told he would be ok with an (after the deadline) positive test result because the tournament needed him commercially. There's a lack of clarity and consistency in the federal responses. Plus, applying the same rules for everyone or not, choosing not to review his visa before he landed is a pretty dumb move by the authorities given the level of publicity and public interest in the case.
If he did indeed have the misfortune to catch covid just a couple off days before the last possible date for him to complete quarantine and fly - then his conduct in wandering around in public during what should have been a quarantine period is outrageous. It's not up to Australia to punish him for that, but it certainly makes me think he's a public health hazard and that he's used to getting away with rule bending/breaking. Judges have different rules to stick to though.