Director General, Department of Education & Training -v- Mullett & anor (GD) [2002] NSWADTAP 13

Appeal Panel

CITATION: Director General, Department of Education & Training -v- Mullett & anor (GD) [2002] NSWADTAP 13 revised - 11/06/2002 APPELLANT Director General, Department of Education & Training PARTIES: FIRST RESPONDENT Christpher Mullett SECOND RESPONDENT Robert John Randazzo FILE NUMBER: 019040 HEARING DATES: 05/10/2001 SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 10/05/2001 DATE OF DECISION: 04/26/2002

Mullett & anor -v- Director General, Department of Education & Training [2001] NSWADT 119 DECISION UNDER APPEAL: BEFORE: O'Connor K - DCJ (President); Montgomery S - Judicial Member; Bolt M - Member CATCHWORDS: adequacy of reasons - no evidence - relevant/irrelevant considerations - unreasonableness MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter FILE NUMBER UNDER APPEAL: 003353 DATE OF DECISION UNDER APPEAL: 07/18/2001 LEGISLATION CITED : Freedom of Information Act 1989 Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 Mullett -v- Director General, Department of Education and Training [2001] NSWADT 119 Re Easdown and Director of Public Prosecutions (1987) 2 VAR 102 Department of Social Security v Dyrenfurth (1988) 80 ALR 533 (Fed Ct, FC) Corbett v Australian Federal Police (1986) 11 ALN N249 Re Williams and Registrar, Federal Court (1985) 8 ALD 219 Ryder v Booth [1985] VR 870 Attorney General's Dept v Cockcroft (1986) 64 ALR 97 CASES CITED: Re B and Brisbane North Regional Health Authority (1994) 1 QAR 279 Bennett v Vice Chancellor, University of New England [2000] NSWADT 8 Hope v Bathurst City Council (1980) 144 CLARE 1 Azzopardi v Tasman UEB Industries Ltd (1985) 4 NSWLR 139 Haines v Lever & Anor (1987) 8 NSWLR 442 Associated Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corp [1948] 1 KB 223 Minister for Aboriginal Affairs & Anor v Peko-Wallsend & Ors (1986) 66 ALJR 299 Re Horesh and Ombudsman (1986) 1 VAR 149 Re Lapidos and Ombudsman (no 1) (1987) 2 VAR 82 APPELLANT K Sant, barrister REPRESENTATION: FIRST RESPONDENT In person SECOND RESPONDENT In person ORDERS: 1. The decision is affirmed in respect of the following passages: (a) paras 29-30; (b) the last sentence of para 34; and (c) the deleted words in para 35 (It is noted that the Tribunal's decision to affirm the exemption of the second two lines of the table in para 74 was not in issue in the appeal.); 2. The decision is set aside in respect of the following passages: (a) the fourth sentence of para 51; (b) the first sentence of para 53; and (c) all passages as listed in para [22] of these reasons; 3. The Appeal Panel is to reconvene to consider whether to grant leave to extend the appeal to the merits.