Hanel and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Hanel to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) for release from the implied undertaking of confidentiality, commonly known as the *Harman* undertaking, in relation to documents filed under compulsion in earlier proceedings. These earlier proceedings involved Mr Hanel's claims for compensation for anxiety, depression, and stress, and for medical expenses, against his former employer, Comcare. The *Harman* undertaking generally prevents documents obtained through compulsory process in litigation from being used for any purpose other than the proceedings in which they were produced, unless leave is granted by the court or tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether to grant Mr Hanel's application for release from the *Harman* undertaking. Specifically, the Tribunal needed to consider the grounds upon which such an undertaking could be released, particularly when the documents were sought for purposes beyond the original compensation claims, such as making complaints to regulatory bodies. The Tribunal also had to assess the applicant's stated intention to use the documents to seek "restorative justice" and hold the respondent to account, in light of the history of their interactions.

The Tribunal considered the principles governing the release of documents subject to the *Harman* undertaking, as outlined in its General Practice Direction and as discussed in case law such as *Glencore Coal Pty Ltd v Franks*. These principles involve weighing competing public interests, including the public interest in the administration of justice and the preservation of confidentiality, against potential public interest in disclosure, such as in the investigation of criminal offences. The Tribunal noted that a broad, "carte blanche" approach to release was not ideal, preferring a more specific approach where the nature of the complaint and the relevance of particular documents could be assessed. Mr Hanel argued for a broad release to avoid multiple applications and to facilitate his complaints to various regulatory bodies, stating that the documents were relevant to these complaints.

Ultimately, the Tribunal found that all matters before it in the original compensation proceedings had been resolved. The Tribunal noted the ongoing tension between the applicant and the respondent, and the applicant's stated intention to seek restorative justice. However, the decision does not specify the final orders made regarding the release of the documents, other than noting the applicant's previous partial releases for specific purposes.