Hartnett and Sampson

In *Hartnett and Sampson*, the parties were the applicant, Hartnett, and the respondent, Sampson. The dispute concerned the validity of a notice to produce documents issued by the respondent to the applicant under s 19 of the *Freedom of Information Act 1982* (Cth). The matter came before Moore J of the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the notice to produce was validly issued, specifically whether the respondent had reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant possessed documents relevant to the respondent's investigation into a complaint. This involved an examination of the scope of the respondent's investigative powers under the *Freedom of Information Act 1982* (Cth) and the requirements for issuing a notice to produce.

Moore J considered the purpose of the notice to produce, which is to facilitate the gathering of information necessary for an investigation. His Honour found that the respondent's belief that the applicant held relevant documents was based on information received from a third party and the nature of the applicant's involvement in the matter under investigation. The Court held that the respondent had met the threshold of having reasonable grounds to believe the applicant possessed relevant documents, and therefore the notice to produce was validly issued.

The application for review was dismissed.