NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Marden v Pharmacy Council of NSW [2016] NSWCATAD 86 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 06 May 2016 Decision date: 06 May 2016 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: J Lucy, Senior Member Decision: 1. Applicant's application to the Tribunal is made within time. 2. The second respondent has established a prima facie case that the public interest consideration against disclosure in cl 3(a) of the table in s 14 of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW) applies in the circumstances of this case. 3. The second respondent has not discharged the onus of establishing that any other public interest considerations against disclosure apply in the circumstances of this case and the Tribunal will not have regard to any other public interest considerations against disclosure in determining the correct and preferable decision. 4. The applicant is to file and serve submissions and evidence on which she seeks to rely within 3 weeks of the date of these reasons, identifying any earlier submissions or evidence on which she continues to rely. 5. The second respondent is to file and serve submissions and evidence on which the second respondent seeks to rely within 3 weeks of the date of these reasons, identifying any earlier submissions or evidence on which the second respondent continues to rely. 6. The first respondent and Information Commissioner are to file and serve submissions and evidence on which they seek to rely within 5 weeks of the date of these reasons, identifying any earlier submissions or evidence on which they continue to rely. 7. Any party who wishes to reply to submissions made by another party or the Information Commissioner is to do so within 7 weeks of the date of these reasons. 8. Matter will then be reserved to be determined on the papers, subject to considering any submissions to the effect that a hearing is required. 9. The parties have liberty to apply on 3 days' notice. Catchwords: GOVERNMENT INFORMATION – Whether application out of time - Whether applicant was entitled to apply for Tribunal review whilst Information Commissioner review pending – Applicant so entitled. REVIEW RIGHTS – Extension of time to seek review where multiple decisions made in respect of an access application – Period of time during which review rights are extended PUBLIC INTEREST CONSIDERATIONS AGAINST DISCLOSURE – Whether complainant has discharged onus of establishing that they apply – Whether disclosure of information could reasonably be expected to reveal personal information; prejudice court proceedings; expose person to risk of harm, serious harassment or serious intimidation; prejudice person's professional interests; or prejudice the supply of confidential information. Legislation Cited: Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) Cases Cited: Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue (2009) 239 CLR 27 AEZ v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2013] NSWADT 90 Attorney General's Department v Cockcroft (1986) 10 FCR 180 Hurst v Wagga Wagga City Council [2011] NSWADT 307 Marden v Pharmacy Council of New South Wales [2015] NSWCATAD 230 McKinnon v Blacktown City Council [2012] NSWADT 44 Smith v Pittwater Council [2016] NSWCATAD 67 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Judith Marden (Applicant) Pharmacy Council of NSW (First Respondent) Complainant (Second Respondent) Representation: Solicitors: K Mills (Applicant) Pharmacy Council of NSW (First Respondent) Complainant in person (Second Respondent) File Number(s): 1410583 Publication restriction: Pursuant to s 64(1)(a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), the disclosure of the Second Respondent's name is prohibited.Pursuant to s 64(1)(a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) and s 107 of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW), the publication of the paragraphs in the confidential version of this decision marked "Not for Publication" and their disclosure to the applicant is prohibited.
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