CCB v Department of Education and Communities

The case of CCB v Department of Education and Communities involved a dispute regarding access to government information under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (NSW). The applicant, CCB, sought access to information held by the respondent, the Department of Education and Communities. The dispute centred on whether the Department should provide access to certain documents, including a principal's diary, a school incident report, and notifications of injury. The matter was heard by the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales.

The court had to determine several legal issues. Firstly, whether a non-publication order was desirable to protect the identity of a child whose information would otherwise be revealed in connection with an allegation of violence. Secondly, whether the applicant had the capacity to make the application and if they were a person aggrieved. Thirdly, whether the scope of the application was determined by the scope of the application to the agency or by the internal review application. Fourthly, whether the advice provided by an in-house government lawyer qualified as legal professional privilege. Fifthly, whether the information requested was personal information and if its disclosure could breach information protection principles or health privacy principles.

The court found that a non-publication order was not desirable as the child’s identity would inevitably be revealed due to the public nature of the allegation. Regarding capacity, the court determined that the applicant did not have the capacity to make the application but was a person aggrieved. The scope of the application was found to be determined by the internal review application, not the initial application to the agency. The court also found that the advice provided by the in-house lawyer did not qualify as legal professional privilege due to a lack of evidence of independence. Finally, the court held that the information requested was not personal information and that its disclosure would not breach privacy principles.

The court ordered that the Department provide access to the principal’s diary, except for the two lines of information protected by legal professional privilege. The decision to provide access to other specified information and to refuse access to the school incident report and Work Health and Safety incident report was affirmed.