I don't have access to The Australian, but from what I can glean it seems to be an odd sequence..
If that was the sequence, how did the The Australian explain the woman not testing positive till the Tuesday after she had left quarantine on the Sunday (so she would have had at least one negative test as otherwise would not have left quarantine), whereas the the nebuliser case tested positive during quarantine? Plus she did not infect any close contacts after leaving.
On the surface it would seem odd that the "Index Case" would generate a negative test after having infected another person with such a brief and distant exposure as you would expect that they would needed to have had a very high viral load, and to have tested positive well before she did. So she was meant to virulent enough that she was aerosolising the virus, but not virulent enough to generate a positive till many days after she supposedly was a spreader?
I mean if that swab was generating a super-spreader type exposure, surely the person being swabbed would have returned a positive test?
I would be interested in how The Australian explains how this all occurred.