Carmody v Information Commissioner and Ors (2)

The case of Carmody v Information Commissioner and Ors revolves around a dispute concerning the disclosure of certain documents under the Right to Information Act 2009 (Qld). The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Information Commissioner (IC) had correctly interpreted the provisions of the Act in determining that certain documents should be made available to media outlets. This decision was further complicated by the question of whether the documents in question were properly characterised as documents of the Department of Justice and Attorney-General (DJAG) and whether they were exempt from the Right to Information Act due to their connection to the Supreme Court's judicial functions.

The court examined the relevant sections of the Act, including sections 12, 14, 17, and the provisions in schedule 2, part 2, item 1, to determine if the IC had erred in her interpretation. The court found that the IC's determination that the Supreme Court was part of the DJAG for the purposes of the RTI Act was flawed and incompatible with the independence of the Supreme Court. Furthermore, the court held that the IC had made an error in interpreting sections 14, 17, and schedule 2, part 2, item 1 of the RTI Act. The IC had failed to conclude that the documents in dispute contained "exempt information" as defined under the Act and had also erred in determining that disclosure was in the public interest.

In light of these findings, the court upheld the appeal by the applicant and DJAG against the IC's decision. The court set aside the IC's order of 27 June 2016, which had mandated the disclosure of the documents in dispute. Instead, the court ordered that access to the documents in dispute be refused. The court also reserved the costs of the appeal with liberty to the parties to apply to the Tribunal on 28 days’ notice on the issue of costs.