Abdelaziz v StateCover Mutual Ltd [2015] NSWCATAD 1

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Abdelaziz v StateCover Mutual Ltd [2015] NSWCATAD 1 Hearing dates: 26 November 2014, 16 December 2014 Date of orders: 12 January 2015 Decision date: 12 January 2015 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: Prof G. Walker, Senior Member Decision: Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Catchwords: GOVERNMENT INFORMATION (PUBLIC ACCESS) -- jurisdiction – what is an "agency" – StateCover Mutual Ltd not an agency. Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997; Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013; Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009; Government Information (Public Access) Regulation 2009 Texts Cited: M Paterson, Freedom of Information and Privacy in Australia: Government and Information Access in the Modern State (2005) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ahmed Abdelaziz (Adam Aziz) (applicant) State Cover Mutual Limited (respondent) Representation: Mr M Kunnen (agent for applicant) Solicitors: Ms J Nand, Sparke Helmore (respondent) File Number(s): 1410575

reasons for decision 1. The applicant Ahmed Abdelaziz (Adam Aziz) on 3 June 2014 applied to the respondent for access to certain information held by it in relation to a workers' compensation claim. 2. When the respondent did not make a decision on the application within the prescribed time, the applicant lodged an application with this tribunal on 8 October 2014 on the basis of a deemed refusal within the meaning of s 63 of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (GIPA Act) and seeking a review of the deemed refusal. 3. The application to the tribunal was listed for a planning meeting or directions hearing on 26 November 2014. At that meeting the respondent raised a preliminary objection of law in the nature of a demurrer ore tenus on the basis that the respondent StateCover Mutual Ltd is not an "agency" within the meaning of the GIPA Act and that consequently any information it holds is not "government information" to which a person may seek access under the Act. As a result the tribunal would lack jurisdiction to hear and determine the application for review. 4. The respondent having made oral submissions to that effect, the matter was adjourned to give the applicant an opportunity to prepare submissions in response. On the adjourned date, 16 December 2014, both parties presented oral submissions and foreshadowed possible written submissions to be filed and exchanged by the close of business on 24 December.