Woods -v- Chief Executive Officer, State Rail Authority [2002] NSWADT 253

Set aside by Appeal : Set aside by Appeal on 10 July 2003

CITATION: Woods -v- Chief Executive Officer, State Rail Authority [2002] NSWADT 253 DIVISION: General Division APPLICANT PARTIES: Lindsay Woods RESPONDENT Chief Executive Officer, State Rail Authority FILE NUMBER: 023048 HEARING DATES: 03/07/2002 SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 07/03/2002 DATE OF DECISION: 12/03/2002

BEFORE: Hennessy N - Magistrate (Deputy President) APPLICATION: access to documents - confidential material - access to documents - operation of agencies - access to documents - personal affairs - Freedom of Information Act - access to documents - confidential material - Freedom of Information Act - access to documents - operation of agencies - Freedom of Information Act - access to documents - personal affairs MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter LEGISLATION CITED : Freedom of Information Act 1989 Protected Disclosures Act 1994 Commissioner of Police v District Court of New South Wales (Perrin's case ) (1993) 31 NSWLR 606 Mangoplah Pastoral Co Pty Ltd v Great Southern Energy [1999] NSWADT 93 A v Director General, Department of Health [2002] NSWADT 59 Colakovski v Australian Telecommunications Commission (1991) 29 FCR 429 Re Dale and Australian Federal Police (1997) 47 ALD 417 oung v Wicks (1986) 13 FCR 85 at 89 per Beaumont J; Department of Social Security v Dyrenfurth (1988) 80 ALR 533 Wiseman v Commonwealth of Australia (unreported, Federal Court, 24 October 1989.) CASES CITED: In Re Williams (1985) 8 ALD 219 In Re Griffith and the Queensland Police Service (unreported decision No 97013, 15 August 1997) Hutchinson and Department of Human Services (1997) 12 VAR 422 Re Maher and Attorney General's Department (1985) 7 ALD 731 Re B and Brisbane North Regional Health Authority (1994) 1 QAR 279 Ryder v Booth [1985] VR 870 Attorney General's Dept v Cockcroft (1986) 64 ALR 97 Re B and Brisbane North Regional Health Authority ((1994) 1 QAR 279 APPLICANT REPRESENTATION: K Woods, agent RESPONDENT M Leeming, barrister ORDERS: 1. The agency's decision not to release "the petition" is set aside. In substitution for that decision, a decision is made to grant the applicant access to the petition.