Dewhirst v Department of Family and Community Services
Case
•
[2015] NSWCATAD 13
•29 January 2015
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Dewhirst v Department of Family and Community Services [2015] NSWCATAD 13
[2015] NSWCATAD 13
29 January 2015
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In Dewhirst v Department of Family and Community Services, the applicant sought access to notifications made to the respondent about a specified child that named him. The Department of Family and Community Services refused to provide the information, citing the conclusive presumption against disclosure in clause 10 of Schedule 1 of the Government Information (Public Access) Act. The applicant challenged this decision, arguing that the notifications were not made in good faith and that the Tribunal should be able to look behind the certificate issued by the delegate of the Secretary of the respondent under subsection 29(1A) of the Children and Young Person (Care and Protection) Act. Additionally, the applicant sought an order for costs, arguing that the respondent's conduct gave rise to special circumstances that warranted such an order.
The court had to determine whether the conclusive presumption against disclosure applied, and if the Tribunal could look behind the certificate issued by the delegate. The court also had to consider whether the respondent's conduct gave rise to special circumstances that warranted an order for costs. The court found that the conclusive presumption against disclosure applied, and that the Tribunal could not look behind the certificate issued by the delegate. The court also found that the respondent's conduct did not give rise to special circumstances that warranted an order for costs.
The decision of the respondent in regard to the information remaining in issue was affirmed. However, the respondent was ordered to pay the applicant an amount of $376.80 in costs. The court found that the respondent's conduct did not give rise to special circumstances that warranted an order for costs, but the applicant was still entitled to costs due to the nature of the proceedings and the respondent's failure to provide the information sought in a timely manner. The court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant $376.80 in costs.
The court had to determine whether the conclusive presumption against disclosure applied, and if the Tribunal could look behind the certificate issued by the delegate. The court also had to consider whether the respondent's conduct gave rise to special circumstances that warranted an order for costs. The court found that the conclusive presumption against disclosure applied, and that the Tribunal could not look behind the certificate issued by the delegate. The court also found that the respondent's conduct did not give rise to special circumstances that warranted an order for costs.
The decision of the respondent in regard to the information remaining in issue was affirmed. However, the respondent was ordered to pay the applicant an amount of $376.80 in costs. The court found that the respondent's conduct did not give rise to special circumstances that warranted an order for costs, but the applicant was still entitled to costs due to the nature of the proceedings and the respondent's failure to provide the information sought in a timely manner. The court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant $376.80 in costs.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Administrative Review
-
Costs
-
Access to Information
-
Judicial Review
-
Statutory Interpretation
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
GHW v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice [2024] NSWCATAD 126
Cases Citing This Decision
10
FZC & FYX v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice
[2024] NSWCATAD 318
GHW v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice
[2024] NSWCATAD 126
FLF v Children's Guardian
[2022] NSWCATAD 380
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
3
Director General, Dept of Family and Community Services v Few
[2013] NSWSC 1448
Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force v Camilleri (GD)
[2012] NSWADTAP 19
Spillane v Department of Family and Community Services
[2014] NSWCATAD 169