Frost v Commissioner of Police

[2020] NSWCATAD 62

Civil and Administrative Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Frost v Commissioner of Police [2020] NSWCATAD 62
Hearing dates:	28 January 2020
Date of orders:	28 January 2020
Decision date:	21 February 2020
Jurisdiction:	Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before:	K Ransome, Senior Member
Decision:	(1)   Application for recusal refused. (2)   Application for non-publication order refused. (3)   Application for order that mechanism be set up for respondent and respondent’s solicitor to provide certain information to the applicant refused.
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – recusal – non-publication – information to be provided outside Tribunal process
Legislation Cited:	Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009
Category:	Procedural and other rulings
Parties:	Julie Frost (Applicant) Commissioner of Police (Respondent)
Representation:	Solicitors: Applicant (Self Represented) Crown Solicitor (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2019/00353931
Publication restriction:	Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. On 11 November 2019 Ms Julie Frost sought review by the Tribunal of a decision made by the Commissioner of Police under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (GIPA Act).

2. On 19 December 2019 the matter came before the Tribunal, constituted by S Cole DCJ, at a case conference. Following the case conference the matter was remitted to the respondent for reconsideration as the respondent had located further information relevant to Ms Frost’s request. Also at the case conference an application by Ms Frost that her name, her address, her phone number, her email address and the names of her family members be the subject of a non-publication order was refused.

3. The matter then came before me for directions on 28 January 2020. Ms Frost appeared at the directions hearing by telephone and the respondent was represented by a solicitor from the Crown Solicitor’s Office. At the beginning of the directions hearing I introduced myself and Ms Frost immediately asked me to recuse myself. While Ms Frost’s reasons for making the request were a little unclear, it appeared that she believes that I would not be impartial as I had previously been a member of an Appeal Panel which had dismissed her appeal from interlocutory decisions in an unrelated matter. I declined to recuse myself.

4. Ms Frost also asked that a non-publication order be made in this application. I declined to make that order and advised Ms Frost that she should put any further request for a non-publication order in writing.

5. Ms Frost also sought an order that a mechanism be put in place so that the respondent and its legal representatives would be required to provide her with certain information. I declined to make such an order.

6. The directions hearing proceeded and directions were made for the filing and exchange of evidence and the matter set down for hearing on 11 May 2020.

7. Ms Frost has sought written reasons for the decisions I made during the directions hearing other than the procedural directions which were in fact made.

Recusal application

8. The basis upon which Ms Frost made the application that I recuse myself was unclear but appears to stem from her belief that, as a member of the Appeal Panel which had earlier refused an application for adjournment of the unrelated appeal proceedings, failed to recuse itself from dealing with the appeal and dismissed the appeal, I was somehow biased against her. She referred during the directions hearing to my previous failure to provide “disability adjustment”.

9. I advised Ms Frost that the purpose of the directions hearing was to ensure that the matter was ready to progress to hearing where the substantive issues could be determined. I was not, at the directions hearing, dealing with any substantive matters, conveying any view about those matters or making a decision on her application. I note that Ms Frost raised no objection to the procedural directions which were in fact made at the end of the directions hearing relating to the exchange of evidence and the like.

10. Ms Frost did not raise any matters which would indicate that I had a pre-existing state of mind or was prejudiced against her in any way which meant that I was unable to deal with her matter adequately and fairly in determining its future progress through the Tribunal. I therefore declined to recuse myself and proceeded, within the limited time available, to deal with the other issues raised and to make procedural directions.

Non-publication order

11. Ms Frost’s request for a non-publication order in this application had been determined by Judge Cole on 19 December 2019. When Ms Frost raised the issue again before me I advised her to make any further application for such an order in writing. I was conscious that the respondent was not on notice of any such request and, as this matter was listed for directions along with other matters in a directions list, time was not available to deal with any request on the day.

Provision of information by the respondent

12. Ms Frost asked for an order to be made requiring the respondent and the respondent’s solicitors to provide her with certain information. Ms Frost referred to information about potential harm to herself and stalking. It was not clear whether the information sought by her relates to the present proceedings. The Tribunal, of course, has no power to make any general orders for the provision of information to an applicant outside the scope of a review application. I was satisfied that any request for information which is relevant to Ms Frost’s present application under the GIPA Act could be dealt with by way of a direction that the respondent is to provide all documents and evidence to Ms Frost and the Tribunal by a certain date. Such a direction was made.

Orders

1. Application for recusal refused.

2. Application for non-publication order refused.

3. Application for order that mechanism be set up for respondent and respondent’s solicitor to provide certain information to the applicant refused.

**********

I hereby certify that this is a true and accurate record of the reasons for decision of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales.

Registrar

Decision last updated: 21 February 2020