NSW Caselaw
Set aside by Appeal : Decision re documents 1, 27 & 54 set aside by appeal on 17/5/01 otherwise decision affirmed
CITATION: Charteris v General Manager, Leichhardt Municipal Council [2000] NSWADT 81 DIVISION: General Division APPLICANT Geoffrey Ivan Charteris PARTIES: RESPONDENT General Manager, Leichhardt Municipal Council FILE NUMBER: 993259 HEARING DATES: 05/04/00, 05/06/00, 06/06/00 SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 06/06/2000 DATE OF DECISION: 06/22/2000
BEFORE: Smith MB - Judicial Member APPLICATION: access to documents - Freedom of Information Act - access to documents MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter LEGISLATION CITED : Freedom of Information Act 1989 Beesley v Commissioner of Police [2000] NSWADT 52 Mangoplah Pastoral Co. Pty Ltd v Great Southern Energy (No 2) [2000] NSWADT 4 Raethel v Director-General, Department of Education and Training [2000] NSWADT 56 Daykin v SAS Trustee Corporation [2000] NSWADT 51 CASES CITED: Attorney-General (NT) v Maurice (1986) 161 CLR 475 Goldberg v Ng (1995) 185 CLR 83 Mann v Carnell [1999] HCA 66 Esso Australia Resources Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [1999] HCA 67 Tunchon v Commissioner of Police [2000] NSWADT 73 APPLICANT REPRESENTATION: P Singleton, solicitor RESPONDENT C Ronalds, barrister ORDERS: 1. The decision under review is set aside in so far as it concerns documents numbered 18, 23, 32, 52, 59, 61, 62, 63, and 70, and in relation to those documents it is decided that the applicant should be given access to the whole of documents 18, 32, 59, 61, 62 and 63 and to such parts of documents 23, 52, 70 as remain after deletions are made in accordance with paragraphs 23 and 24 of the reasons for this decision.; 2. The decision under review is otherwise affirmed.; 3. Liberty to either party to apply for clarification of the above orders.; 4. Direct that any party seeking an order for costs should apply within 21 days of this decision in writing to the Tribunal with notice to the other party and supported by any submissions and evidence in writing, and that the other party should file and serve its submission and evidence in response 21 days thereafter. Subject to any application to the contrary, the question of costs is then to be decided on the papers and without further hearing.
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