A separate case led by Lizzie Jarrett and Lees overturned the post-Bondi protest laws, with the NSW Court of Appeal ruling the PARD framework invalid, and the government again facing costs after losing the case.

Analysts expect the outcomes to push the government to rethink protest-law reform and anticipate substantial costs for both sides of the litigation.

Activist groups, including Palestine Action Group, denounced the spending as waste that undermines democratic rights.

Separate administrative challenges related to the Major Events powers, including a Herzog visit, cost the government around $27,000 in defense, and the government ultimately won that case.

Overall, the government spent more than $400,000 on legal fees related to two constitutional challenges to the Minns administration’s protest laws.

The ruling requires redrafting the laws to protect worshippers from harassment or obstruction when accessing places of worship.

Taxpayers may also cover activists’ legal costs in the Bondi-related case, with estimates ranging from tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars, and final costs for the activists’ side were not yet settled.

The Pard laws were rushed to empower police to ban protests near key sites after Bondi, a move that legal experts warned could trigger constitutional issues.

One challenge by Josh Lees argued that protest restrictions around places of worship were overly broad, costing the government about $184,584 in legal costs after losing, with a further $98,456 in defense costs.

The New South Wales government has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal fees defending constitutional challenges to protest laws enacted after the Bondi beach terrorist attack, including a notable $117,455.50 spent on challenging the Pard public assembly restriction laws.

Reaction to the rulings included criticism of taxpayer-funded litigation waste and concern that costs could run high for both sides of the dispute.

The Court of Appeal in April struck down the PARD laws for unjustifiably burdening the implied right to freedom of political communication, with costs awarded to the plaintiffs and final taxpayer costs still to be tallied.