Kelson v Queensland Police Service

In this appeal under the Right to Information Act 2009 (Qld), the appellant, Mr Kelson, sought access to various documents related to complaints against, and investigations by, the Queensland Police Service (QPS) arising from an incident on 25 October 2012. The appellant's application for access was initially refused by the Public Safety Business Agency (PSBA), on behalf of the QPS, and that decision was upheld on internal review. Mr Kelson then appealed to the Information Commissioner (IC) for external review, which appeal was ultimately dismissed by the IC. The central issue before the court was whether the IC had erred in law in reaching its decision.

The court examined several grounds of appeal, including whether the IC erred in failing to include a certain document within the scope of the access application, whether the IC failed to consider a relevant public interest factor, whether the IC incorrectly weighted and balanced the factors favouring disclosure and non-disclosure, whether the IC erred in not granting access to information in a different form, and whether the IC erred in not providing Mr Kelson with an opportunity to be de-identified in the decision. The court found that the appeal could only be on a question of law and that the errors of law alleged by Mr Kelson were not clear on the face of the application but were later clarified in his submissions.

The court concluded that the appeal was allowed only in respect of the ground of appeal by which Mr Kelson contended that the IC erred in failing to consider a relevant factor favouring disclosure. The court found that the IC had failed to consider Schedule 4, Part 2, Item 5 of the Right to Information Act 2009 (Qld) alongside the factors already considered. The court set aside the decision of the IC and remitted the matter to the IC for reconsideration. The court also ordered that any submissions on which the parties intended to rely in relation to costs be filed by a specified date, and that the issue of costs would be determined on the papers unless either party requested an oral hearing.