NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Marist Brothers St Joseph's College v Transport for NSW [2020] NSWCATAD 288 Hearing dates: 25 August 2020 Date of orders: 26 November 2020 Decision date: 26 November 2020 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: S Montgomery, Senior Member Decision: (1) The decision under review is set aside. (2) The decision is made that access to the request information is refused. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Access to information – whether public interest considerations against disclosure out weight the public interest considerations in favour of disclosure – refusal of access – correct and preferable decision - risk of harm or of serious harassment or serious intimidation Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 Cases Cited: AEZ v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2013] NSWADT 90 DTB v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2019] NSWCATAD 114 Ermel v Department of Finance and Services [2013] NSWADT 183 Miskelly [v Transport for NSW [2017] NSWCATAD 75 Zonnevylle v Department of Education and Communities [2018] NSWCATAD 139 Texts Cited: None cited Category: Principal judgment Parties: Marist Brothers St Joseph's College (Applicant) Transport for NSW (Respondent) Representation: Solicitors: Carroll & O'Dea Lawyers (Applicant) Crown Solicitor (Respondent) File Number(s): 2020/00125416 Publication restriction: The disclosure of the access applicant's identity and information that identifies or tends to identify the access applicant; the identities of the Applicant's witnesses and the statements provided by those witnesses; and the remaining evidence filed by the Applicant other than to the parties or the Information Commissioner is prohibited. This order is made pursuant to section 64(1) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013. Those paragraphs of these reasons identified as [Not for disclosure] are not to be released other than to the Applicant or the Respondent without further order of the Tribunal.
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