Dattilo v Commissioner of Police - [2021] NSWCATAD 349

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Dattilo v Commissioner of Police [2021] NSWCATAD 349
Hearing dates: 2 November 2021
Date of orders: 19 November 2021
Decision date: 19 November 2021
Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before: J D Little, Senior Member
Decision:
(1) I set aside orders 2 and 3 made on 2 November 2021.
(2) I confirm orders 4 and 5 made on 2 November 2021.
(3) Pursuant to s 59 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW), copies of the documents comprising the Confidential Material (which were the subject of the Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021), are not required to be lodged with the Tribunal.
(4) Pursuant to s 64(1)(d) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, disclosure of the Confidential Statement dated 19 October 2021 and the Closed Submissions dated 19 October 2021, and of matters contained in that Statement or in those Submissions, is restricted to the Respondent, the legal representatives for the Respondent and the Tribunal.
(5) Pursuant to s64(1)(b) and s 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, the publication and reporting of the interlocutory hearing of 2 November 2021 is prohibited.
(6) Pursuant to s64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, publication of the Confidential Material (which was the subject of the Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021), and of matters contained in that material, is prohibited pending further order.
(7) Pursuant to s 64(1)(d) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, disclosure of Confidential Material (which was the subject of the Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021), and of matters contained in that material, is restricted to the Respondent, the legal representatives for the Respondent and the Tribunal, pending further order
(8) Except pursuant to order (9) below, all paragraphs marked “[Not for publication]” are not to be published pursuant to s 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.
(9) A copy of these reasons, without redaction, shall be released to the Respondent.
(10) The Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021 is otherwise dismissed.

Catchwords:
NON-DISCLOSURE – firearms – confidential documents – s 59 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997

Legislation Cited:
Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW)
Civil and Administrative Act 2013 (NSW)
Firearms Act 1996 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
Ainscough v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2021] NSWADT 47
Bellamy v Bellamy [2018] NSWSC 534
Grant v Commissioner of Police [2020] NSWCATAD 158
State of New South Wales (Justice Health) v Dezfouli [2008] NSWADTAP 69

Category: Procedural rulings
Parties: Giovanni Dattilo (Applicant)
Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
Hartman & Associates (Applicant)
Bartier Perry (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2021/00220961
Publication restriction:
(1) Pursuant to s 59 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW), copies of the documents comprising the Confidential Material (which were the subject of the Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021), are not required to be lodged with the Tribunal.

(2) Pursuant to s…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Dattilo v Commissioner of Police

Details

AGLC: Dattilo v Commissioner of Police [2021] NSWCATAD 349
Case: [2021] NSWCATAD 349
Decision Date: 19 November 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Dattilo v Commissioner of Police, the Civil and Administrative Tribunal (CAT) was tasked with resolving a dispute concerning the disclosure of confidential documents related to firearms. The Respondent, the Commissioner of Police, sought to prevent the disclosure of certain documents and statements made during the proceedings. The central issue for the Tribunal was whether the confidentiality of certain documents should be maintained under the provisions of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 and the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013. The Tribunal was required to balance the public interest in transparency and accountability with the need to protect sensitive information that could compromise operational security or personal privacy.

The Tribunal began by considering the specific provisions of the relevant Acts, which empower it to restrict disclosure of certain materials in the interest of national security or to protect personal information. The Tribunal acknowledged the importance of confidentiality in law enforcement operations but also recognised the public's right to understand the basis for administrative decisions that affect their rights and interests. After weighing these competing considerations, the Tribunal concluded that the confidentiality of the documents in question should be maintained to protect sensitive operational information. The Tribunal found that the public interest in maintaining the confidentiality of the documents outweighed any potential benefit from their disclosure.

As a result, the Tribunal set aside certain orders that required the disclosure of the documents and confirmed others that restricted their disclosure. The Tribunal also ordered that the documents should not be published or reported on, except for specific purposes authorised by the Tribunal. The Tribunal's decision underscored the delicate balance between transparency and security, highlighting the need for careful consideration of the specific circumstances of each case. The Tribunal's final orders reflected its determination to protect sensitive information while ensuring that its decisions were accessible to the parties involved and the public where appropriate.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) I set aside orders 2 and 3 made on 2 November 2021.

(2) I confirm orders 4 and 5 made on 2 November 2021.

(3) Pursuant to s 59 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW), copies of the documents comprising the Confidential Material (which were the subject of the Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021), are not required to be lodged with the Tribunal.

(4) Pursuant to s 64(1)(d) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, disclosure of the Confidential Statement dated 19 October 2021 and the Closed Submissions dated 19 October 2021, and of matters contained in that Statement or in those Submissions, is restricted to the Respondent, the legal representatives for the Respondent and the Tribunal.

(5) Pursuant to s64(1)(b) and s 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, the publication and reporting of the interlocutory hearing of 2 November 2021 is prohibited.

(6) Pursuant to s64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, publication of the Confidential Material (which was the subject of the Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021), and of matters contained in that material, is prohibited pending further order.

(7) Pursuant to s 64(1)(d) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, disclosure of Confidential Material (which was the subject of the Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021), and of matters contained in that material, is restricted to the Respondent, the legal representatives for the Respondent and the Tribunal, pending further order

(8) Except pursuant to order (9) below, all paragraphs marked “[Not for publication]” are not to be published pursuant to s 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.

(9) A copy of these reasons, without redaction, shall be released to the Respondent.

(10) The Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021 is otherwise dismissed.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Dattilo v Commissioner of Police [2021] NSWCATAD 349
Hearing dates:	2 November 2021
Date of orders:	19 November 2021
Decision date:	19 November 2021
Jurisdiction:	Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before:	J D Little, Senior Member
Decision:	(1) I set aside orders 2 and 3 made on 2 November 2021. (2) I confirm orders 4 and 5 made on 2 November 2021. (3) Pursuant to s 59 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW), copies of the documents comprising the Confidential Material (which were the subject of the Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021), are not required to be lodged with the Tribunal. (4) Pursuant to s 64(1)(d) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, disclosure of the Confidential Statement dated 19 October 2021 and the Closed Submissions dated 19 October 2021, and of matters contained in that Statement or in those Submissions, is restricted to the Respondent, the legal representatives for the Respondent and the Tribunal. (5) Pursuant to s64(1)(b) and s 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, the publication and reporting of the interlocutory hearing of 2 November 2021 is prohibited. (6) Pursuant to s64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, publication of the Confidential Material (which was the subject of the Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021), and of matters contained in that material, is prohibited pending further order. (7) Pursuant to s 64(1)(d) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, disclosure of Confidential Material (which was the subject of the Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021), and of matters contained in that material, is restricted to the Respondent, the legal representatives for the Respondent and the Tribunal, pending further order (8) Except pursuant to order (9) below, all paragraphs marked “[Not for publication]” are not to be published pursuant to s 64(1)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013. (9) A copy of these reasons, without redaction, shall be released to the Respondent. (10) The Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021 is otherwise dismissed.
Catchwords:	NON-DISCLOSURE – firearms – confidential documents – s 59 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997
Legislation Cited:	Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Act 2013 (NSW) Firearms Act 1996 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	Ainscough v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2021] NSWADT 47 Bellamy v Bellamy [2018] NSWSC 534 Grant v Commissioner of Police [2020] NSWCATAD 158 State of New South Wales (Justice Health) v Dezfouli [2008] NSWADTAP 69
Category:	Procedural rulings
Parties:	Giovanni Dattilo (Applicant) Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force (Respondent)
Representation:	Solicitors: Hartman & Associates (Applicant) Bartier Perry (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2021/00220961
Publication restriction:	(1) Pursuant to s 59 of the Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997 (NSW), copies of the documents comprising the Confidential Material (which were the subject of the Respondent’s application heard on 2 November 2021), are not required to be lodged with the Tribunal. (2) Pursuant to s…