NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: DDL v Mid-Western Regional Council [2018] NSWCATAD 2 Hearing dates: 29 November 2017 Date of orders: 17 January 2018 Decision date: 17 January 2018 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: C Ludlow (Senior Member) Decision: 1.The respondent's decision of 6 February 2017 is varied as follows: a) Access to the information contained in the report is granted with the exception of the information described in Confidential Exhibit 1.
2. Pursuant to s 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, paragraphs [36], [40], [44], [47], [48], and [52] and parts of other paragraphs as indicated of these reasons are not to be published.
3. Pursuant to s 107(1) of the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009, Confidential Exhibit 1 is not to be published.
4. Pursuant to s 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, any evidence filed with the Tribunal is not to be published with the exception of any evidence quoted in the published reasons.
5. Pursuant to s 64(1)(a) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, the name of the applicant, or any information which might identify or lead to the identification of the applicant is not to be published . Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Government Information – unsubstantiated allegations which are defamatory – prejudice to legitimate professional or financial interests Legislation Cited: Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 Cases Cited: Attorney-General's Department v Cockcroft (1986) 10 FCR 180 Battin v University of New England [2013] NSWADT 73 DDT v Charles Sturt University [2017] NSWCATAD 329 Hurst v Wagga Wagga City Council [2011] NSWADT 307 Pemberton v Macquarie University [2014] NSWCATAD 76 Richards v Commissioner, Department of Corrective Services [2011] NSWADT 98 Zonnevylle v NSW Department of Finance and Services [2015] NSWCATAD 175 Texts Cited: Macquarie Dictionary Halsbury's Laws of Australia Category: Principal judgment Parties: DDL (Applicant) Mid-Western Regional Council (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Ms K Richardson with Ms M Hall (Applicant)
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