Administrative
Appeals
Tribunal
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2004] AATA 1097
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No Q2004/208
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION ) Re WILLIAM PYE Applicant
And
AUSTRALIAN POSTAL CORPORATION
Respondent
DECISION
Tribunal Senior Member K L Beddoe Date22 October 2004
PlaceBrisbane
Decision The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.
.................[Sgd]........................
Senior Member
REASONS FOR DECISION
22 October 2004 Senior Member K L Beddoe 1. The applicant applied under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (“the Act”) for access to:
“All documents relative to the sale of the Sandgate Post Office located in Bowser Parade, Sandgate, Queensland to DM and MG Cross and Tinpike Pty Ltd for the sum of $390,000.”
2. The applicant’s letter of application then referred to specific documents to be included in his request for access as follows:
“This should include but not be limited to:
all correspondence prepared or received dealing with the negotiations of the sale,
a copy of the contract of sale,
copy of valuation by independent valuer at $280,000,
copy of lease agreement on the new mail sorting building in Connaught Street, Sandgate,
copy of lease agreement of a shop in the proposed shopping centre,
the amount of rental being paid for the Sandgate Post Office until the proposed shopping centre is ready for occupation.”
3. The respondent decided it was exempt within the terms of section 7 of the Act in relation to the applicant’s request. It also decided section 41 of the Act exempted the requested documents.
4. On internal review the respondent decided to affirm its initial decision.
5. The object of the Act is found in sub-section 3(1) of the Act which reads as follows:
“3 Object
(1) The object of this Act is to extend as far as possible the right of the Australian community to access to information in the possession of the Government of the Commonwealth by:
(a)making available to the public information about the operations of departments and public authorities and, in particular, ensuring that rules and practices affecting members of the public in their dealings with departments and public authorities are readily available to persons affected by those rules and practices; and
(b)creating a general right of access to information in documentary form in the possession of Ministers, departments and public authorities, limited only by exceptions and exemptions necessary for the protection of essential public interests and the private and business affairs of persons in respect of whom information is collected and held by departments and public authorities; and
(c)creating a right to bring about the amendment of records containing personal information that is incomplete, incorrect, out of date or misleading.”
6. Sub-section 11(1) provides, inter alia, that it is the intention of Parliament that the provisions of the Act shall be interpreted so as to further the object set out in sub-section 3(1).
7. Subsection 3(2) provides, subject to the Act, that every person has a legally enforceable right to obtain access in accordance with the…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Pye and Australian Postal Corporation and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2004] AATA 1097
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Tribunal was tasked with determining the legal applicability of the exemptions outlined in the Freedom of Information Act 1982 and the Australian Postal Corporation Act 1989. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the documents in question could be classified as relating to the commercial activities of the Corporation, which, if true, would exempt them from disclosure. Additionally, the court examined relevant case law, including Hodges v Frost, Hansen v Queensland Industry Development Corporation, and Re Geary and Australian Wool Corporation, to interpret the scope and application of the exemption clauses.
In its reasoning, the Tribunal concluded that the documents indeed related to the commercial activities of the Australian Postal Corporation. The Tribunal affirmed that these documents were exempt from disclosure under section 13 of the Freedom of Information Act 1982, as they were deemed to pertain to the commercial operations of the Corporation. This decision was consistent with the precedents set by earlier cases, which had similarly upheld exemptions in analogous situations. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the decision under review, denying Mr. Pye's request for access to the documents.
The Tribunal's final order affirmed the decision that the documents in question were exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 1982. This outcome ensured that the commercial activities of the Australian Postal Corporation remained protected from public scrutiny in this instance.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.