Sandor v Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services

In the matter of *Sandor v Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services*, the applicant, Sandor, sought judicial review of a decision made by the respondent, the Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services. The dispute concerned the Department's refusal to provide Sandor with access to certain records relating to his deceased son, pursuant to the *Public Records Act 2002* (Qld). The application was heard by Judge Jarrett in the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the Department had lawfully exercised its discretion under section 32(1) of the *Public Records Act 2002* to refuse access to the records. Specifically, the Court was required to determine if the Department had properly considered the relevant factors, including the public interest in disclosure and the potential harm that disclosure might cause, when making its decision. Sandor argued that the Department had failed to adequately consider his interests as the father of the deceased and had relied on irrelevant considerations in its refusal.

Judge Jarrett reasoned that the Department's decision-making process had been flawed. The Court found that the Department had not properly balanced the competing interests, particularly the applicant's legitimate interest in accessing records concerning his deceased child. The Department's reliance on a general policy of protecting the privacy of individuals mentioned in the records, without a specific assessment of the potential harm in this particular case, was found to be an error of law. The Court emphasised that the discretion under section 32(1) required a specific and individualised assessment, not a blanket application of policy.

Consequently, Judge Jarrett ordered that the Department's decision to refuse access to the records be set aside. The matter was remitted back to the Department with a direction to reconsider the application for access in accordance with the reasons provided by the Court.