Hayley Paddon v Northern NSW Local Health District [2020] NSWCATAD 24

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Hayley Paddon v Northern NSW Local Health District [2020] NSWCATAD 24 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 20 January 2020 Decision date: 20 January 2020 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: C Mulvey, Senior Member Decision: The board of the Northern NSW Local Health District meets the definition of being an 'agency' pursuant to the provisions of s5 of the GIPA Act. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – government information – preliminary question - whether the board of a local health district is an public authority. Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 Health Services Act 1997 Cases Cited: None cited Texts Cited: None cited Category: Principal judgment Parties: Hayley Paddon (Applicant) Northern NSW Local Health District (Respondent) Representation: Solicitors:

T Lawson (Respondent) Applicant (Self Represented) File Number(s): 2019/00022935 Publication restriction: Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION 1. Ms Hayley Paddon, (the applicant) applied for information from the Northern NSW Local Health District (the respondent) under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (the GIPA Act) on 10 August 2018 (Access Application). The information related essentially to communication passing between the respondent and its board members. 2. On 28 August 2018, the applicant entered into a negotiation with the respondent as to the scope of the Access Application. On 6 September 2018, the respondent made a decision that no documents had been found that fell within the scope of the Access Application. 3. External review of the 6 September 2018 decision was undertaken by the Information and Privacy Commission (IPC) following a request by the applicant. 4. On 19 December 2018, the respondent internally reviewed its decision, and, decided to provide to the applicant information which was outside the terms of the Access Application. 5. On 24 January 2019, the applicant, by her agent Dr Allison Adams, filed with this Tribunal an application under the GIPA Act. The applicant seeks that the Tribunal review the decision of the respondent made 19 December 2018, which related to a request for the following information: 1. All correspondence (record, report, draft report, request, consultation, electronic records, meeting notes or other files) between any of the following people on the respondent's Board: Dr John Griffin, Mr Pat Grier, Ms Carolyn Byrne, Professor Susan Nancarrow, and Mr Mark Humphries; and any other persons or businesses, regarding the site selection process for the proposed Tweed Valley Hospital site within the Tweed Shire, which may also be referred to in communication as a 'green belt' or 'green field' site. 2. All reports and correspondence (record, report, draft report, request, consultation, electronic records, meeting notes or other files) between the following individuals: Dr John Griffin, Mr Pat Grier, Ms Carolyn Byrne, and Mr Mark Humphries; and any other persons or businesses, in relation to the respondent's clinical services plan. 3. All correspondence (record, report, draft report, request, consultation, electronic records, meeting notes or other files) between Ms Carolyn Byrne and Mr Glenn Searle, Mr Don Beck, Mrs Lynn Beck, Mr Idwall Richards, Mr Alan McIntosh, Mr Warren Polglase, Mr James Owen, Mr Pearce Allsop, Mr Wes Allen, Mr Phillip Hanna, Mr Kerry Prichard, Mr Duane Joyce, Mr Joe Agius.