NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Brazel v Sydney Water Corporation [2025] NSWCATAD 15 Hearing dates: 3 December 2024 Date of orders: 14 January 2025 Decision date: 14 January 2025 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: M Riordan, Senior Member Decision: (1) The decision dated 31 October 2023, as varied on 14 November 2023, is affirmed. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – administrative review – Government information – legal professional privilege – prior determinations in proceedings between the parties - res judicata and issue estoppel – applicable principles – correct and preferable decision Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW) Legal Profession Uniform Act No 16a of 2014 Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (NSW) Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 (VIC) Cases Cited: Battin v University of New England [2013] NSWADT 73, Brazel v Sydney Water [2020] NSWCATAD 188 Brazel v Sydney Water [2022] NSWCATAP 180 Brazel v Sydney Water Corporation [2021] NSWCATAP 13 Brazel v Sydney Water (No 2) [2021] NSWCATAD 370 Commissioner of Police (NSW) v Danis [2017] NSWCATAP 7 Fisher v Goulburn Mulwaree Council [2019] NSWCATAD 34 Flack v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police [2011] NSWADT 286 Gates v Port Macquarie-Hastings Council [2022] NSWCATAD 193 Hall v Department of Premier and Cabinet (NSW) [2012] NSWADT 46 Hurst v Wagga Wagga City Council [2011] NSWADT 307 Leech v Sydney Water Corporation [2010] NSWADT 298 Loielo v Giles [2020] VSC 619 Loielo v Giles [2020] VSC 722 McKinnon v Secretary, Department of Treasury (2006) 228 CLR 423 Meldru v Wollondilly Shire Council [2017] NSWCATAD 292 Shoebridge v Forestry Corporation of NSW [2016] NSWCATAD 93 Taylor v Destination NSW [2017] NSWCATAD 272 Texts Cited: None Category: Principal judgment Parties: Thomas Brazel (Applicant) Sydney Water Corporation (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: T Bateman (Respondent)
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