Scaffidi v Chief Executive Officer, Department of Local Government and Communities

In the case of Scaffidi v Chief Executive Officer, Department of Local Government and Communities, the appellant, Scaffidi, a council member, challenged the decision of the Chief Executive Officer, Department of Local Government and Communities, who found her to have committed serious breaches of the Local Government Act 2009 (ACT). The breaches arose from her failure to disclose in her annual returns gifts and contributions to travel provided by third parties, including accommodation and travel arrangements by the APC, a political party. The legal issues before the court were whether the provision of accommodation and travel by third parties constituted a 'gift' for the purposes of the Act, and whether the Tribunal erred in finding that the appellant committed a serious breach each time she did not disclose such gifts and contributions in her annual returns.

The court found that the purpose of the disclosure regime under the Local Government Act 2009 (ACT) is to identify failures by members to disclose interests at meetings and recuse themselves from consideration of a matter in which they were interested, and to prevent the member's participation in decisions which may affect the financial interests of those associated persons. The court held that contrary to the findings of the Tribunal, the purpose of the regime is not to prevent council members from establishing interests which could improperly influence their decisions, but rather to require that, where such an interest exists, the council member must disclose the interest and not participate in a decision which could affect that interest. The court further held that the provision of accommodation and travel by third parties did constitute a 'gift' for the purposes of the Act, and that the appellant's failure to disclose such gifts and contributions in her annual returns constituted a serious breach of the Act.

The court granted the appellant leave to appeal against the Breach decision, but dismissed the appeal on all grounds. The court held that the Tribunal's findings were supported by the evidence, and that the Tribunal did not err in law in finding that the appellant committed a serious breach each time she did not disclose gifts and contributions to travel provided by third parties in her annual returns. The court held that the provision of accommodation and travel by third parties did constitute a 'gift' for the purposes of the Act, and that the appellant's failure to disclose such gifts and contributions in her annual returns constituted a serious breach of the Act. The court further held that the Tribunal's reasons were adequate, and that there was no error in law in the Tribunal's findings.