Chapman v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police [2004] NSWADT 35

Set aside by Appeal : Set aside in part by Appeal on 13 May 2004

CITATION: Chapman v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police [2004] NSWADT 35 DIVISION: General Division APPLICANT PARTIES: Colin Chapman RESPONDENT Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police FILE NUMBER: 033003 HEARING DATES: 20/05/2003 SUBMISSIONS CLOSED: 11/03/2003 DATE OF DECISION: 02/20/2004

BEFORE: Hennessy N - Magistrate (Deputy President) APPLICATION: access to documents - adequacy of search - access to documents - document available from agency - access to documents - law enforcement & public safety - access to documents - personal affairs - access to documents - substantial and unreasonable diversion of agency's resources - Freedom of Information Act - access to documents - adequacy of search - Freedom of Information Act - access to documents - document available from agency - Freedom of Information Act - access to documents - law enforcement & public safety - Freedom of Information Act - access to documents - personal affairs - Freedom of Information Act - access to documents - substantial and unreasonable diversion of agency's resources MATTER FOR DECISION: Principal matter Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Cth) LEGISLATION CITED : Freedom of Information Act 1982 (Vic) Freedom of Information Act 1989 Freedom of Information Act 1992 (Qld) Privacy & Personal Information Protection Act 1998 Attorney General's Department v Cockcroft (1986) 64 ALR 97 Beesley -v- Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2000] NSWADT 52 BY v Director General, Attorney General's Department [2002] NSWADT 79 Director General, Department of Education and Training v Mullett & Randazzo (GD) [2002] NSWADTAP 13 Mangoplah Pastoral Co Pty Ltd -v- Great Southern Energy [1999] NSWADT 93 N (No. 3) v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2002] NSWADT 34 Patsalis v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police Service [2003] NSWADT 213 Re "T" and Queensland Health (1994) 1 QAR 386 Re A and Department of Human Services (unreported, VCAT, Davis PM, 4 November 1998) CASES CITED: Re Anderson and the Australian Federal Police (1986) 11 ALD 355 Re Anti-Fluoridation Association of Victoria and Secretary to Department of Health (1985) 8 ALD 163 Re Chapman and Victoria Parks (unreported, VCAT, Ball SM, 6 December 1999) Re Coulston and Office of Public Prosecutions [2001] VCAT 10 Re Lapidos and Auditor-General of Victoria (1989) 3 VAR 343 Re Lawless and Secretary to Law Department and Ors (1985) 1 VAR 42 Re Mildenhall and Department of Education (unreported, VCAT, Lyons SM, 9 April 1999) Re SRB and SRC (1994) 33 ALD 171 Re Ward and Australian Federal Police (No. V85/414, 20 February 1987, unreported) Re Waterford and Department of Treasury (No 2) (1984) 5 ALD 588 Secretary, Department of Treasury and Finance v Kelly (2001) 18 VAR 427v APPLICANT REPRESENTATION: In person RESPONDENT C Capper, advocate ORDERS: 1. The Agency's decision in respect of paragraph 1(a) and 1(b) of the Applicant's application is affirmed with one exception. The decision that photographs of Richmond railway station are not held by the Agency is set aside and remitted under s 63(3)(d) of the ADT Act for reconsideration.; 2. The Agency's decision in respect of paragraph 1(c) of the Applicant's application, to refuse access to the notebook entries of Inspector Oswald, is set aside. The Agency's decision to grant access to Inspector Oswald's notebook with certain entries deleted is also set aside. In substitution for that decision, a decision is made to grant access to the deleted entries in Inspector Oswald's notebook. ; 3. The Agency's decision in respect of paragraph 1(e) of the Applicant's application to refuse access to the notebook entries of Constable Allan, is set aside under s 63(3)(d) of the ADT Act and remitted for reconsideration. ; 4. The Agency's decision in respect of paragraph 1(g) of the Applicant's application to refuse access to the notebook entries of Officer Hatter is set aside under s 63(3)(d) of the ADT Act and remitted for reconsideration. ; 5. The Agency's decisions in respect of paragraphs 1(d) and 1(f) of the Applicant's application are set aside under s 63(3)(c) of the ADT Act. In substitution for the Agency's decision to refuse access, a decision is made to provide the Applicant with a copy of the requested documents. ; 6. The Agency's decision in respect of paragraph 1(h) of the Applicant's application is affirmed. ; 7. The Agency's decision in respect of paragraph 2 of the Applicant's application is set aside and remitted to the Agency under s 63(3)(d) of the ADT Act for reconsideration. ; 8. The Agency's decision in respect of paragraph 3 of the Applicant's application is set aside under s 63(3)(d) of the ADT Act and remitted for reconsideration. ; 9. The Agency's decision in respect of paragraph 4 of the Applicant's application is set aside and remitted to the Agency under s 63(3)(d) of the ADT Act for reconsideration. ; 10. The Agency's decision in respect of paragraph 5 is set aside under s 63(c) of the ADT Act. In substitution for that decision, the Applicant is to be given access to the documents requested.; 11. The Agency's decisions in respect of paragraphs 6 and 7 of the Applicant's application are affirmed.