Hall v Roads and Maritime Services

Administrative Decisions Tribunal

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	Hall v Roads and Maritime Services [2012] NSWADT 239
Hearing dates:	On the papers
Decision date:	19 November 2012
Jurisdiction:	General Division
Before:	Judicial Member Naida Isenberg
Decision:	The decision under review is affirmed
Catchwords:	motor vehicle - application for address of owner
Legislation Cited:	Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 Road Transport (Driver Licensing) Act 1998 Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Act 1997 Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918
Cases Cited:	Commissioner of Police v Camilleri [2012] NSWADTAP 19 Flack v Commissioner of Police [2011] NSWADT 286 Leech v Sydney Water Corporation [2010] NSWADT 298 Hurst v Wagga Wagga City Council [2011] NSWADT 307 Morgan v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2012] NSWADT 42
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Colin Hall (Applicant) Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent)
Representation:	C Hall (Applicant in person) Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent)
File Number(s):	123173

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

1. Mr Colin Hall, the applicant, engaged 'JF' to undertake some work around his pool which Mr Hall regards as defective. He wishes to contact Mr F with a view to making good the work or seeking recompense. Unfortunately he did not retain Mr F's contact details and the only information he has about him is the registration number of the motor vehicle he drove.

1. On 27 July 2011 the applicant made an access application under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009(GIPA Act) to the respondent for access to information regarding the most recent address of [JF] who he claimed was the owner of vehicle [number] (the access application).

1. The respondent refused access to the information on the basis that, on balance, the public interest considerations against disclosure of the information outweighed the public interest considerations in favour of disclosure as disclosure of the information would involve the disclosure of an individual's personal information.

1. The decision was reviewed by the Office of the Information Commissioner (OIC), who agreed with the respondent's decision.

1. The applicant seeks review of the decision.

Relevant Legislation

1. The objects of the GIPA Actare set out in s. 3, which provides:

3 Object of Act

(1) In order to maintain and advance a system of responsible and representative democratic Government that is open, accountable, fair and effective, the object of this Act is to open government information to the public by:

(a) authorising and encouraging the proactive public release of government information by agencies, and

(b) giving members of the public an enforceable right to access government information, and

(c) providing that access to government information is restricted only when there is an overriding public interest against disclosure.

(2) It is the intention of Parliament:

(a) that this Act be interpreted and applied so as to further the object of this Act, and

(b) that the discretions conferred by this Act be exercised, as far as possible, so as to facilitate and encourage, promptly and at the lowest reasonable cost, access to government information.

1. It was not disputed that the information the subject of this…