AQO v Gregory Pearce MLC

[2014] NSWCATAD 210

NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

AQO v Gregory Pearce MLC [2014] NSWCATAD 210

Hearing dates:

On the papers

Decision date:

03 December 2014

Jurisdiction:

Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division

Before:

S Montgomery, Senior Member

Decision:

1. The Tribunal therefore has jurisdiction to hear and determine this matter.

2. The matter is remitted for determination by the Respondent.

3. The determination is to be completed within 28 days of the date of this decision.

4. The matter is listed for a further planning meeting on 13 January 2015 at 2 pm.

Catchwords:

Health Records and Information Privacy - jurisdiction - whether the Minister is a public sector agency

Legislation Cited:

Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013
Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998
Health Records and Information Privacy Act 2002

Cases Cited:

Arogen v Leighton [2013] NSWSC 1099
Fountain v Alexander (1982) 150 CLR 615 at 629; 40 ALR 441
GA & Ors v Department of Education & Training and NSW Police [2004] (GD) NSWADTAP 18
JD v Medical Board (NSW) [2008] NSWADT 67
MG v Department of Education and Training [2004] NSWADT 137
Pape v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (2009) 238 CLR 1
Travelex Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (2010) 241 CLR 510
Williams v Commonwealth (2012) HCA 23

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

AQO (Applicant)
Gregory Pearce MLC (Respondent)

Representation:

J Rogers Harris & Harris Solicitors (Applicant)
Crown Solicitors Office (Respondent)

File Number(s):

133148, 133147

reasons for decision

1. This matter was commenced in the General Division of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal ("the ADT") pursuant to the Administrative Decision Tribunal Act 1997 ("the ADT Act"). On 1 January 2014, the ADT was abolished and its functions were taken over by the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales ('NCAT'). The present decision is therefore a decision of NCAT. However, because the proceedings to which it relates are 'part heard proceedings' as defined in clause 6(1) of Schedule 1 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, they are to be determined as if that Act had not been enacted (see clause 7(3)(b) of this Schedule).

1. The application was initially listed before Senior Member Molony, who conducted planning meetings and listed the matter for determination. However after the matter was reserved for determination, Senior Member Molony became unavailable. The President of NCAT determined to substitute the Senior Member for myself as permitted under section 52 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (the NCAT Act) and sought the parties' views in accordance with the provisions of section 52.

1. The Registrar of the Tribunal wrote to the parties in respect of the proposed substitution. Neither party objected to me determining the matter. In the absence of any submission to the contrary, the Tribunal was reconstituted in accordance with section 52 (3) of the NCAT Act.

1. Each of the parties has filed material in response to directions made by Senior Member Molony. I have considered the material provided by both…