Miriani v Legal Aid Commission of New South Wales [2021] NSWCATAD 346

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Miriani v Legal Aid Commission of New South Wales [2021] NSWCATAD 346 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 18 November 2021 Decision date: 18 November 2021 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: S Goodman SC, Senior Member Decision: The decision under review is affirmed. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – access to government information – access application – review of decision that information not held by an agency Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW) Cases Cited: CLT v Department of Education [2021] NSWCATAD 249 Commissioner of Police v Danis [2017] NSWCATAP 7 Wojciechowska v Commissioner of Police [2020] NSWCATAP 173 Texts Cited: Nil Category: Principal judgment Parties: Joe Miriani (Applicant) Legal Aid Commission of New South Wales (Respondent) Representation: Applicant (self-represented) Respondent (self-represented) File Number(s): 2020/00016944 Publication restriction: Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction 1. The applicant made an access application under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW) ("GIPA Act") to the respondent for various species of information set out in a schedule to the access application. 2. Following a deemed refusal of the access application, the applicant filed an application for administrative review in the Tribunal. 3. In accordance with directions made by the Tribunal, the respondent provided a Notice of Decision ("Decision") in which it identified a series of documents in a Schedule of Documents containing information responsive to the access application and decided to grant access to all of those documents in their entirety. 4. The applicant's position is that the respondent has not provided him with access to all of the information within the scope of his access application. 5. For the reasons set out below, the decision under review is affirmed.