NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: FDC v Secretary, Department of Education [2021] NSWCATAD 264 Hearing dates: 14 September 2020 Date of orders: 13 September 2021 Decision date: 13 September 2021 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: S Goodman SC, Senior Member Decision: The decision of the respondent under s 58(1)(d) of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 to refuse access to information because of an overriding public interest consideration against disclosure of the information is: (a) varied, by granting the applicant access to the following information within 28 days of the date of these Orders: (i) pages 342, 345, 673 and 674 without redaction; (ii)page 352, with the name of the staff member redacted; (b) affirmed with respect to pages 353, 354, 435 and 665. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – access to government information – access application – public interests in favour of disclosure – public interests against disclosure – whether overriding public interest against disclosure Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 Workplace Health and Safety Act 2011 Cases Cited: Alexander v University of Sydney [2008] NSWADT 214 AMH v Western New South Wales Local Health District [2013] NSWADT 282 Camilleri v Commissioner of Police (NSW) [2013] NSWADT 80 Commissioner of Police v Danis [2017] NSWCATAP 7 Flack v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police [2011] NSWADT 286 Forbidden Foods Pty Ltd v Rice Marketing Board of New South Wales [2020] NSWCATAD 18 Hurst v Wagga Wagga City Council [2011] NSWADT 307 Independent and Regulatory Tribunal v Services Sydney Pty Ltd [2008] NSWADTAP 79 Jenkinson v Department of Education and Communities [2013] NSW ADT 280 Jones v NSW Department of Education [2017] NSWCATAD 51 Luxford v NSW Department of Education and Communities [2016] NSWCATAD 118 Macquarie University v Howell (No 2) [2009] NSWADTAP 19 Martin v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police [2005] NSWADT 23 McInnes v NSW Department of Education and Communities [2013] NSWADT 219 McKinnon v Blacktown City Council [2012] NSWADT 44 McMahon v Director General, Department of Fair Training [2003] NSWADT 164 McMillan v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force; Brady v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2013] NSWADT 53 Meacham v Commissioner of Police [2020] NSWCATAP 107 Miskelly v Roads and Maritime Services [2019] NSWCATAD 133 Newcastle City Council v Newcastle East Residents Action Group [2018] NSWCATAP 254 Robinson v Department of Health [2002] NSWADT 222 Selby v Commissioner of Police (NSW) [2013] NSWADT 61 Singh v Legal Aid Commission (No. 2) [2015] NSWCATAD 5 Taylor v Office of Destination NSW [2018] NSWCATAD 195 Transport for NSW v Searle [2018] NSWCATAP 93 Troskie v NSW Department of Education and Communities [2014] NSWCATAD 155 Category: Principal judgment Parties: FDC (Applicant) Department of Education (Respondent) Representation: Applicant (self-represented) Respondent (self-represented) File Number(s): 2019/00390023 Publication restriction: Pursuant to s 64 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013:
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