Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Bartlett v Sage (No 2) [2011] FCA 274 Citation: Bartlett v Sage (No 2) [2011] FCA 274
Parties: PETER MERVYN BARTLETT v GE (TIM) SAGE, EXAMINER, AUSTRALIAN CRIME COMMISSION and COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION
File number: WAD 62 of 2010
Judge: SIOPIS J
Date of judgment: 25 March 2011
Catchwords: EVIDENCE – whether a party claiming public interest immunity in relation to the exercise of coercive statutory powers is required to adduce evidence which demonstrates a prima facie case that the party acted lawfully in the exercise of those powers as a condition of claiming the immunity – whether redaction of documents allowed on the basis of public interest immunity – whether redaction allowed on the basis of relevance.
Legislation: Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 (Cth) ss 7C, 28, 59(7)
Cases cited: Alister v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 404 National Companies and Securities Commission v News Corporation Ltd (1984) 156 CLR 296 Attorney-General (NT) v Kearney (1985) 158 CLR 500 State of Victoria v Brazel (2008) 19 VR 553 Sankey v Whitlam (1978) 142 CLR 1
Date of hearing: 30 September 2010
Place: Perth
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate